After nearly three years of litigation Dr. Warren and co. over at eHarmony got the message that, gosh darned it, gay and lesbian people want to have serious relationships too.

The makers of eHarmony already had a site dedicated to individuals seeking same-sex relationships called Compatible Partners. So what was the problem?

Initially, Compatible Partners did not exist. It was created by eHarmony in a settlement from a similar class action lawsuit in New Jersey.

Secondly, bisexual users of eHarmony services had to pay two fees in order to search for heterosexual and same-sex relationships, even though someone using eHarmony did not need to pay an extra fee to conduct searches in exciting categories such as “Black” and “Senior” dating.

Californians felt this was in poor business practice and segregated customers based on sexual orientation, which provided grounds on which to sue.

Although the creators of the site admit no wrongdoing they agreed to add a category for those seeking same-sex relationships to their homepage. Additionally, the one fee will apply to both straight and GLBT users of eHarmony.

So why was there so much resistance to this decision?  Well, creator Robert Warren claims his matchmaking technique has only been studied in heterosexual couples. But the foot dragging was likely based on the fact that Warren is an evangelical Christian, and did not want to lose the support of "pro-family" groups. Yikes.

Personally, I am really surprised they folded, but maybe it’s a sign of the times? A sign that the days of neglecting the gay and lesbian population of America is no longer a decision that goes without consequences, and both a company’s image, as well as their pocketbook are at stake.

He gives her the talk like this: 

"Things with you and Adam have been progressing emotionally for weeks now. I suspect that pretty soon, you're going to start getting more physical and women are never too prepared. So what I want you to do is take this with you when you go overnight with Adam."

Here's the thing: men worry that if the bring a condom the woman will be turned off because it comes off as presumptious. Women don't think to bring condoms because they think the guys want to handle it. But in fact, a man finds it very reassuring when a woman comes prepared.

In my opinion, he's going a little further than a contract obligation to bring up the name Trojan. He was asking women to be realistic and prepared when headed into a situation where sex is a possibility, and that the responsibility to be safe is on both partners involved. Angel does act embarrassed and is worried to be perceived as a "slut," but Steve adamantly assures that it's better to be prepared.

I am so proud that he addressed this topic on this show.. it's an important message and men and women regardless of sexual orientation need to hear: 

Will the idea that children need a mother AND a father go the way of the dinosaurs? 
 
In a five-year study conducted by the University of Southern California research has found that same sex couples are as effective at parenting as heterosexual couples. Here is a quote from the USA Today article on the matter: 

"It's more about the quality of the parenting than the gender of the parents," says Judith Stacey of New York University, co-author of the comprehensive review.

Criteria such as self-esteem, academic performance and social skills were just some of the criteria researchers used to determine the well being of the children of both types of households. According to Timothy Biblarz, sociologist and other primary researcher of the study, the results are "Statistically indistinguishable." with the exception of one issue: lactation. 

The findings of this study also determined that regardless of sexual identity and marital statuses, children better thrive in two-parent homes as compared to single-parent households. 

And how do boys fair in households solely run by women? According to the study, their masculinity does not suffer in the absence of a father. 

The research confirms what many supporters of same-sex families and children of such families have known for years: a home full of love is what is best for the child, regardless of the gender or sexual orientation of the parents who are providing it.  

Hopefully more studies comes forth that chip away at the presumption that well adjusted children need parents from both genders, thus providing same-sex couples with more opportunities and support to share their love by becoming parents.

In other recent news, the sky is blue, and fast food it bad for you. 

Amanda Hess has a great blog called The Sexist  over at the Washington City Paper website. She recently blogged about a case in Ottawa wherein a hospital worker had sexually assaulted a female patient. In convicting the man of sexual assault, the judge cited the woman's attractiveness as evidence -

"...It’s depressing that even as a judge convicts a man of sexual assault, he insists upon reinforcing the most victim-blaming sentiments about women bringing unwanted attention onto themselves based on how they look and what they’re wearing."

Unbelievable isn't it? Click here for the full post.

A short post about the controversy over interracial dating, particularly within the Black community, stirred up by the latest cover of Essence magazine...

Racialicious writer Latoya Peterson recently posted an article that comprehensively covers the different responses and issues raised by the choice of Reggie Bush for the cover of the "Black Men, Love, and Relationships" issue.



BET's entertainment blog sums up the issue: 

When Essence editors chose to put Reggie Bush on the cover of their February 2010 “Black Men, Love & Relationships” issue, I’m sure they thought they were just giving their readers a little dose of sexual chocolate eye candy (those abs!), but instead all hell broke loose!

The Essence.com boards are flooded with seething comments from people who can’t understand why a magazine geared towards Black women would make the NFL player who is dating a non-Black woman, Kim Kardashian, the cover choice for an issue that celebrates Black love.

A lot of people have a lot of smart things to say about all of this (and, of course, a lot of people also have some not smart things to say). One of the points I found most interesting was that a lot of people have been "blasting" Kim Kardashian as a white woman...but she may not even identify as white -- she is Armenian, Scottish, and Dutch. Peterson covers the controversy really well and includes links to other buzz about the issue.

Here are a couple random questions I've been mulling over since reading this.

Why do conversations about interracial relationships seem to play up stereotypes so much? 

If the positions were reversed -- that is, if Essence were a magazine directed at straight Black men and used the headline "Black Women, Love, and Relationships" with a picture of a famous, beautiful Black woman who was dating a non-Black guy, would the cover get the same amount of buzz? How would people's reactions be different, or would they be the same?

How do you feel about this article and the reactions it's gotten?

Okay, this post isn't very timely because it's about a CNN article from September 30, but I just read it for the first time and am so turned off (!) by the whole thing that I have come here to rant. The article is describing a new book called "Why Women Have Sex" by psychologists Cindy Meston and David Buss, professors at the University of Texas at Austin.

What makes a woman want to have sex? Is it physical attraction? Love? Loneliness? Jealousy? Boredom? Painful menstrual cramps?

I'm sorry, what? Why is nobody asking why men have sex? Is that supposed to be self-explanatory? Also what is this implication that it's a huge mystery why women want to have sex? Is that supposed to be yet another Secret of the Blushing Woman? That's not a real phrase I just made it up because I am raging.

Okay, okay, part of what the book is going for is to look into the thought processes behind situations when women decide to have sex, and the partners they choose. That IS interesting. But wouldn't it all be more accurately represented by questions like, How do women choose their sexual partners? What factors into a woman's decision to have sex in a given situation? 

Sure, the title Why Women Have Sex is catchy, but in my opinion, it's also underscoring this not-so-extinct notion that men want sex (all the time), and women don't. The question is definitely interesting -- the reasons people have sex can be super complicated. But that's another problem. It's complicated for people. Not just women. Here are some of their groundbreaking discoveries, anyway:

It turns out that women's reasons for having sex range from love to pure pleasure to a sense of duty to curiosity to curing a headache. Some women just want to please their partners, and others want an ego boost.

The article goes on to explain some of the authors' findings. My issue is less with the "findings" and more with how they're described. For example, the author of the CNN article quotes one of the authors, Meston, as saying, 

"Many of the women were having sex purely because they wanted the experience, they wanted the adventure, they wanted to see what it was like to be with men of different ethnicities," she said. "Some women said they wanted more notches on the belt. They simply wanted to get rid of their virginity." 

So close, yet so far from saying, "Some women have sex because they like sex." Instead, we get, "Women want to experiment with different ethnicities." Did "many" of the women really say this? I'm sure some did, but I'd like to believe that The Experience and Adventure of Having Sex With Ethnic People is not a hugely important factor in most women's decision to have sex. Either way, why do we need to paint female sexuality in such a questionable, even racially ignorant light, especially in a short article about a book that probably gives many other reasons why women have sex "for the experience"?

And is it just me (very possible), or is there some weird, vaguely negative undertone to that entire quote? A hint of disdain for those women who want "more notches on their belt"? Condescension or dismissal of the women who want to "get rid of their virginity"? Okay, maybe it's neutral. But I'd be shocked to hear someone argue that it's empowering. 

But now to my favorite problem which you probably have already noticed: Heteronormativity! I mean, that one word pretty much sums it up. Queer women and trans people do not exist in this article. Not sure about the book but it's not looking good. 

Then comes another lovely point. The other author, Buss, is quoted as saying:

"The adaptive problem that women have had to solve is not simply picking a man who is fertile but a man who perhaps will invest in her, a man who won't inflict costs on her, a man who might have good genes that could be conveyed to her children," he said.

In this context, women must also be more selective, because wrong choices can lead to much higher costs than for men: pregnancy and child-rearing.

Has Buss ever heard of a woman supporting herself without a man "investing in her"? What is up with this entire phrase -- that if women make "wrong choices" by sleeping with a guy who doesn't have great genes, she'll be stuck being pregnant and raising a child alone? 

And last but not least, the article ends with a bang, or bomb. 

A 26-year-old heterosexual woman wrote, "When I was single, I had sex for my own personal pleasure. Now that I am married, I have sex to please my husband. My own pleasure doesn't seem as important as his. I believe he feels the same way."

What? Is that seriously the last sentence? If this were coming from an article with a different vibe, it might be a sobering and powerful quote, but here, I just want to go up to the author of the article and say, "Please tell me you know there is something wrong with this statement." There's a good chance the author would say there is, and I would be relieved. But instead, I'm not sure. And I don't think it's okay for an article about "Why Women Have Sex" to be sending an ambiguous message about how women should (or should not) feel empowered about their own sexuality and sexual autonomy.

Since I haven't read the book, it's definitely possible that it's less heteronormative and sends a more empowering message than this article does. I do think it's interesting to hear what women are thinking when it comes to sex, and it's a promising sign that an extensive study was conducted on the subject (and a book written). But I don't think it should be too much to ask for writers to take care in the words they choose and the attitudes they promote when discussing female sexuality. It's irresponsible and despicable to write about female sexuality in a way that is anything less than thoughtful, respectful, and empowering.

While Perusing through the internet, I came across an interesting story about prostitution in Dallas, Texas. According to Associated Press, "The program starts with a monthly roundup of prostitutes in an area health officials consider the national epicenter of syphilis. Dallas vice police have identified more than 1,300 prostitutes working four truck stops serve that more than 2,000 big rigs a day."

"Truckers were conducting counter-surveillance for prostitutes," Dallas police Sgt. Louis Felini said. "They let them use CB radios to advertise prostitution and drugs. As soon as a squad car entered the lot, every truck driver along I-20 knew how many cops and where they were."

With this sting Operation, Many workers are hoping to help the young women get off the streets and turn their lives around, so they offer them a different alternative.

His brainstorm became the Prostitution Diversion Initiative. Police set up a staging area once a month in a vacant lot near the truck stops. Four mobile command trucks surround folding tables and chairs where social service workers set up shop. The action usually begins about 7 p.m. and runs until 3 a.m., according to the Associated Press.

Police confiscate the prostitute's property and interview them for information about criminal activity, such as whether pimps are running underage prostitutes out of area motels. Then social service workers assess the women's drug, alcohol and mental health counseling needs. The women get STD tests and other medical care a mobile health clinic.

WOW

According to Salon.com, "If the women have no felony warrants and seem sincere, the judge gives them the opportunity to avoid jail and enter rehab," according to the AP. "After 45 days of inpatient counseling, they receive help with education, child care and housing.

" There is no doubt these women are desperately in need of the help: The truck stops are the "bottom rung of prostitution," according to Dallas police Sgt. Louis Felini.

"They are trading sex for survival needs: food, a place to sleep," he says. Not to mention, the vast majority are users, crack being the drug of choice."

The Program has been hailed as a Success Story and the city's National Prostitution Diversion conference in November drew hundreds of law enforcement officials from across the U.S. and Canada. But the stats show the extent of the challenge ahead:

Just half of the 375 women rounded up under the program have chosen the rehab option and only 21 have left sex work altogether.

WOW!

My Thoughts...

Many young women are lured into prostitution at a young age by numerous people for many reasons, and it is important that law enforcement, social services, and programs like these are available to show them that their are other options, you don't have to be a victim of your environment. I hope that many other communities will take a look at the Dallas area and find ways they can incorporate such a great idea into their area.

To read more of the article, click here.

To read a blog post about it on Salon.com, click here.

I did it, and so can you!

What he/she says: “I’ve never been tested but I’ve always been safe!”

What he/she means: “I have never been tested and have usually used protection but have potentially exposed myself to STIs that cannot be prevented with some latex barriers such as HPV and genital herpes and have likely never used protection for oral sex giving or receiving.”

More...

I’m currently working on my Master’s thesis project on the topic of obesity in college students and I wondered whether obesity was caused predominately by genetics or behavior.  I thought about my own status and I would consider myself a little thick as well as many of the women on my paternal side of the family.  Black women, in general, are known for their curves: having hips, thick thighs, big butts and in my humble opinion, black women carry extra weight and thickness well.

 

However, our definition of thick and curvaceous is usually actually clinically overweight and obese.  Considering the definition of a BMI greater than 25, this puts many women of color into one of these two categories.   According to the Office of Minority Health, 4 out of 5 African American/ Black women are overweight or obese.  An overwhelming 80% of us are much heavier than we should be.  Along with our desirable curves comes, a multitude of chronic health problems that we as young women may not suffer from the effects of in our 20's, but are inevitable in our 30's, 40's, 50's and contribute to early death within our communities.

 

I came home to Brooklyn, NY for the holidays and it’s the first time that I noticed a contrast from my mostly white neighborhood in Center City, Philadelphia.  Besides the obvious racial differences, the amount of fast food restaurants in Brooklyn had grown.   McDonald’s, Burger King, Kennedy Fried Chicken are noticeably absent in many white and upper class neighborhoods, while they are planted on every block in black, Hispanic, and lower income communities.  However, just because our urban neighborhoods are overrun with greasy fast food, doesn’t mean that we have to patronize them.

 

Whether or not, we are genetically heavier than our white counterparts, we do have control over adapting healthy behaviors. As beautiful women of color, we spend hours and hundreds of dollars on our hair, now let’s take care of our bodies with the same attentiveness. 20 minutes of walking a day makes a world of a difference.   Switching to 2% milk from half and half in your coffee isn’t that noticeable in taste.   Comedian (and Golden Globe Nominee!) Monique, the Queen of "Skinny Women are Evil", has even emerged with a new talk show and 45 lbs lighter. Still a plus sized woman, she looks fabulous, curvy, beautiful and healthier.  We can be size 0 or a size 16 because beauty comes in all shapes and sizes but regardless of that size we should all have a clean bill of health.

 

As the holidays approach, enjoy the festivities and the comfort food with loved ones, but everything in moderation... Ok… Fine… eat until your heart's content for Christmas and New Year’s, but let’s start 2010 with a new appreciation for being healthy and fit.

 

Happy Holidays!