<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Sexism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/sexism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 17:49:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Dolls for girls, science and Legos for boys: The toy aisle is still sexist</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/03/dolls_for_girls_science_and_legos_for_boys_the_toy_aisle_is_still_sexist/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/03/dolls_for_girls_science_and_legos_for_boys_the_toy_aisle_is_still_sexist/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 15:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumerism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peggy Orenstein]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13288677</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A drugstore chain declares science is for boys -- until customers fight back on Twitter]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can't do away with sexism by doing away with sexist labeling. But it's a start. So thanks, Boots. After an embarrassing kerfuffle over what it backwardly deems gender appropriate toys, the UK drugstore chain is moving toward a more equitable display system.</p><p>Boots' enlightenment began after Twitter user Sean E. Gray posted a photo from the store, with the caption "not impressed." It revealed the store's "Girl Toy" section, featuring princess gear and mini tea sets, and the "Boy" section -- chock full of Science Museum brand kits.</p><p>As the Guardian reports, Boots initially defended the placement, saying its real estate choices were based on <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2317559/Boots-removes-store-signs-labellign-girls-boys-toys-customers-complain-sexism.html#ixzz2S2DdqHAN">"customer feedback" and making the stores "easier to navigate."</a> But in the face of mounting criticism, it has since retreated, promising on its Facebook page that "It was never our intention to stereotype certain toys. It's clear we have got this signage wrong, and we're taking immediate steps to remove it from store."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/03/dolls_for_girls_science_and_legos_for_boys_the_toy_aisle_is_still_sexist/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/03/dolls_for_girls_science_and_legos_for_boys_the_toy_aisle_is_still_sexist/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wikipedia&#8217;s shame</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/29/wikipedias_shame/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/29/wikipedias_shame/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wikipedia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amand Filipacchi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[revenge editing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[edit wars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13284840</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sexism isn't the problem at the online encyclopedia. The real corruption is the lust for revenge]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is Wikipedia sexist? Or is it merely an unreliable mess of angry, ax-wielding psychos engaged in agenda-driven editing? Or is it something much more complicated than that?</p><p>Last Wednesday, novelist Amanda Filipacchi <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism-toward-female-novelists.html?_r=0">published an Op-Ed</a> in the New York Times recounting her discovery that Wikipedia editors were culling women authors from Wikipedia's list of "American Novelists" and relegating them into their own subcategory: "American Women Novelists."</p><p>"The intention appears to be to create a list of 'American Novelists' on Wikipedia that is made up almost entirely of men," she wrote, noting that there was no "American Men Novelists" subcategory. (Although, amusingly, just such a category was created shortly after the Op-Ed appeared.)</p><p>In the furor that erupted on Wikipedia in response to Filipacchi's article, it was quickly determined that the bad behavior she noticed appeared to be the work of a single misguided Wikipedia editor. One could argue that, if true, this made the Times' headline "Wikipedia's Sexism Toward Female Novelists" unfair and inaccurate. All of Wikipedia was being tarred by the unthinking stupidity of one bad editor.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/29/wikipedias_shame/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/29/wikipedias_shame/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>104</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>GOP official&#8217;s Facebook status: She&#8217;s &#8220;hot enough to almost make me register Democrat&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/gop_officials_facebook_status_shes_hot_enough_to_almost_make_me_register_democrat/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/gop_officials_facebook_status_shes_hot_enough_to_almost_make_me_register_democrat/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Kush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13281688</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A New Mexico official gets suspended for sexist social media activity -- during a meeting. It's just the beginning]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>His <a href="https://www.facebook.com/kush.steve">Facebook friends</a> call him "an honorable man" who was just "being funny." They say that "People are way to [sic] sensitive in this day and age." But when Steve Kush, the executive director of Bernalillo County's (New Mexico) Republican Party, went on a social media rampage during a local commissioners' meeting about the minimum wage earlier this week, his party chairman, Frank Ruvelo, saw things differently.</p><p>Seems his fellow Republicans did not appreciate what Kush said on Twitter and Facebook regarding a 19-year-old female at the meeting, "Nice hat Working America chick but damn you are a radical bitch." Nor did it enjoy his remarks depicting the organization's state director Chelsey Evans as "Uh oh another Working America chick," or his observation that she had "nice boots…I know she makes more than min wage." And they definitely didn't find it too amusing when he declared that she "was hot enough to almost make me register democrat."</p><p>He's currently suspended, indefinitely, without pay.</p><p><a href="http://newmexico.watchdog.org/17738/i-absolutely-crossed-the-line-bernallio-county-gop-exec-suspended-for-facebook-comments/">"It was an ill-fated attempt at humor,</a>" Kush told Watchdog.org Wednesday. "Do I regret it? Yes … I absolutely crossed the line."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/gop_officials_facebook_status_shes_hot_enough_to_almost_make_me_register_democrat/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/gop_officials_facebook_status_shes_hot_enough_to_almost_make_me_register_democrat/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;American women novelists&#8221; segregated by Wikipedia</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/wikipedia_moves_women_to_american_women_novelists_category_leaves_men_in_american_novelists/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/wikipedia_moves_women_to_american_women_novelists_category_leaves_men_in_american_novelists/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 13:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women writers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Misogyny]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13281605</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wikipedia's overwhelmingly male user-editors began the bizarre forced gender migration on Tuesday ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wikipedia editors have started quietly moving female authors out of the "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_novelists" target="_blank">American novelists</a>" category and into a newly-created sub-category for "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_women_novelists" target="_blank">American women novelists</a>," with the intention, it seems, of creating an"American novelists" page comprised entirely of men. There is currently no corollary sub-category for "American men novelists."</p><p>As American (woman) novelist Amanda Filipacchi <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/opinion/sunday/wikipedias-sexism-toward-female-novelists.html" target="_blank">explained</a> in the New York Times on Wednesday, the process has so far affected women writers whose last names begin with A or B, but others have been moved as well:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/wikipedia_moves_women_to_american_women_novelists_category_leaves_men_in_american_novelists/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/wikipedia_moves_women_to_american_women_novelists_category_leaves_men_in_american_novelists/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Politico reports that New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson is mean, Twitter reacts</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/24/politco_reports_that_new_york_times_executive_editor_jill_abramson_is_mean_twitter_reacts/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/24/politco_reports_that_new_york_times_executive_editor_jill_abramson_is_mean_twitter_reacts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2013 19:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13281029</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dylan Byers' writing about women has created a Twitter maelstrom yet again ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Politico reporter Dylan Byers interviewed a series of frustrated New York Times editors for a <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/new-york-times-turbulence-90544_Page3.html" target="_blank">Tuesday piece</a> on the paper's first female executive editor, Jill Abramson. Quotes from the anonymous interviewees suggest that Abramson is, in effect, not very nice. Byers, for his part, does very little to suggest otherwise, reporting on the executive editor's habit of being curt in meetings and her grave sin of having a "nasal" voice.</p><p>Critics responded that the "niceness" of a top editor at one of the largest newspapers in the world is not news, and that Byers' and others' scrutiny is a product of Abramson's gender, not her qualifications to lead. Others suggest that traits characterized in Abramson as shrill have been celebrated as strengths in other, specifically male, editors.</p><p>Let's see more of what Twitter has to say about the matter here:</p><p>[embedtweet id="327123265564852224"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="327123013579456512"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="327123484100685825"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="327123848464064512"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="327126109877567488"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="327056906210381825"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="327114566825811968"]</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/24/politco_reports_that_new_york_times_executive_editor_jill_abramson_is_mean_twitter_reacts/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/24/politco_reports_that_new_york_times_executive_editor_jill_abramson_is_mean_twitter_reacts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are female-friendly gyms sexist?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/23/are_female_friendly_gyms_sexist/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/23/are_female_friendly_gyms_sexist/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 15:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Body Wars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feminism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Daily Mail]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13279570</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Londoner sues over women-only hours and gets called a jerk and a "limey nutsack." But he might have a fair point]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If a club has a policy of regularly excluding one gender, would you automatically assume it's being sexist? What if the group being shut out is guys?</p><p>That's the question that has set British gym shorts in a proverbial twist in recent weeks, after a man decided to sue London's Kentish Town Sports Centre for offering 442 hours a year for women-only hours.</p><p>Writing last week in the Daily Mail, <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2311098/Peter-Lloyd-Why-Im-suing-gym-sexist-women-hours.html#ixzz2RI9kvgaK ">patron Peter Lloyd explained his beef</a> with the gym, noting that "they still charge them the same full-price membership fee as women, but refuse to offer the equivalent option of male-only sessions." Jezebel promptly labeled Lloyd a "jerk," who should <a href="http://jezebel.com/jackass-suing-his-gym-for-their-442-women-only-hours-pe-476604412">"give us our 442 hours a year and stop crying."</a> Wonkette, meanwhile, less charitably referred to him as a <a href="http://wonkette.com/513321/human-rights-hero-sues-sexist-gym-because-of-ladies-only-yoga-classes">"Limey nutsack." </a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/23/are_female_friendly_gyms_sexist/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/23/are_female_friendly_gyms_sexist/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>26</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Girl Scouts introduce game design and coding curriculum</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/22/girl_scouts_introduce_game_design_and_coding_curriculum/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/22/girl_scouts_introduce_game_design_and_coding_curriculum/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 13:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Girl Scouts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gaming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[video game industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13278271</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cookie season is over. Now, the Girl Scouts have set their sights on closing the gender gap in the gaming industry ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Los Angeles chapter of the Girl Scouts has introduced a merit award for game design in an effort to encourage its members to get involved in science and technology, and help close the gender gap in both fields.</p><p>The California-based chapter partnered with Women in Games International to design the requirements and curriculum for the patch. And while the new focus area isn't recognized organization-wide yet, they hope that will change, soon: "Fostering interest in technology and video game development in females of all ages ... is the main inspiration for working towards a national badge," Sheri Rubin, president and CEO of Design, Direct, Deliver and a member of WIGI's steering committee, <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/ingame/girl-scouts-chapter-add-video-game-patch-1B9522947" target="_blank">told</a> NBC News in an email.</p><p>"Our plan is to start by working with the Girl Scouts of Greater Los Angeles to introduce a local patch and once successful open it up to other councils where game developers are prevalent," she added. "We hope this can be accomplished over the next couple years."</p><p>In addition to designing their own games, scouts will also be learning to code them using a customized version of design program Gamestar Mechanic.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/22/girl_scouts_introduce_game_design_and_coding_curriculum/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/22/girl_scouts_introduce_game_design_and_coding_curriculum/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Hampshire Republican refers to women as &#8220;vaginas&#8221; in email to lawmakers</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/17/new_hampshire_republican_refers_to_women_as_vaginas_in_email_to_lawmakers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/17/new_hampshire_republican_refers_to_women_as_vaginas_in_email_to_lawmakers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 13:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women's Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Hampshire]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13273579</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State Rep. Peter Hansen defended his use of synecdoche in subsequent messages ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>New Hampshire state Rep. Peter Hansen referred to women as "vaginas" in an <a href="http://susanthebruce.blogspot.com/2013/04/vaginas-and-children-first.html?spref=tw&amp;m=1" target="_blank">email to colleagues</a> sent on the Legislature's official internal listserv. In response to a message debating a "stand your ground" measure being considered by the State House, the Republican lawmaker wrote:</p><blockquote><p>What could possibly be missing from those factual tales of successful retreat in VT, Germany, and the bowels of Amsterdam? Why children and vagina's of course. While the tales relate the actions of a solitary male the outcome cannot relate to similar situations where children and women and mothers are the potential victims.</p></blockquote><p>Hansen's use of synecdoche outraged his Democratic and Republican colleagues, prompting Democratic state Rep. Rick Watrous to respond:</p><blockquote><p>"Children and vagina's"??!! Are you really using "vaginas" as a crude catch-all for <span style="text-decoration: underline;">women</span>? Really? Please think before you send out such offensive language on the legislative listserve.</p></blockquote><p>NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/16/new-hampshire-republican-refers-to-women-as-vaginas/" target="_blank">weighed in</a>, too:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/17/new_hampshire_republican_refers_to_women_as_vaginas_in_email_to_lawmakers/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/17/new_hampshire_republican_refers_to_women_as_vaginas_in_email_to_lawmakers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>116</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama apologizes to Kamala Harris</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/obama_apologizes_to_kamala_harris/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/obama_apologizes_to_kamala_harris/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kamala harris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13262922</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The White House says he called her to apologize for his "best looking" comments]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After a rough 24 hours for President Obama in which he took heat from his own political allies on <a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/liberals_groups_threaten_primaries_over_obama_budget/">two big fronts</a>, he called California Attorney General Kamala Harris to apologize for calling her "the best-looking attorney general in the country" at a fundraiser in Northern California yesterday.</p><p>White House press secretary Jay Carney <a href="http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/04/obama-apologizes-to-kamala-harris-160956.html?hp=t3_3">said</a> today that Obama called Harris and apologized for the comment and the distraction that it caused, saying he "did not want in any way to diminish the attorney general's professional accomplishments and her capabilities."</p><p>"He fully recognizes the challenges women continue to face in the workplace and that they should not be judged based on appearance," Carney said.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/obama_apologizes_to_kamala_harris/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/obama_apologizes_to_kamala_harris/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>50</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Women over 50 are invisible</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/wanna_know_what_its_like_to_disappear_try_being_a_woman_over_50_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/wanna_know_what_its_like_to_disappear_try_being_a_woman_over_50_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feministing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ageism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[working women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[essays]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13262719</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rampant ageism and sexism have left women of a certain age virtually powerless in American society]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Ed. note: This is a guest post from Tira Harpaz. Harpaz is a graduate of Princeton University and Fordham Law School and the mother of three children. She was formerly a Senior Attorney at Davis Polk &amp; Wardwell and she is currently the founder and president of CollegeBound Advice, an independent college counseling firm. You can also read <a href="http://feministing.com/2013/03/22/guest-post-leaning-in-doesnt-work-for-everyone/">her first piece for Feministing</a>.</em><br /> <a href="http://www.feministing.com"><img align="left" style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/07/feministing_logo-1.jpg" alt="Feministing" /></a></p><p>Scientists at Duke University’s Center for Metamaterials and Integrated Plasmonics are close to perfecting an “invisibility cloak,” a breakthrough they have been working on since 2006. While I appreciate their efforts, I want to give them a tip: If you want to make a person invisible, just put them in the shoes of an over-fifty woman and abracadabra, watch them disappear.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/wanna_know_what_its_like_to_disappear_try_being_a_woman_over_50_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/wanna_know_what_its_like_to_disappear_try_being_a_woman_over_50_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>43</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to talk about a woman&#8217;s looks</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/how_to_talk_about_a_womans_looks/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/how_to_talk_about_a_womans_looks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 11:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kamala harris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Bloomberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Joe Biden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual harrassment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attorney General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Attorney General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13262203</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The president of the United States fails the test -- again]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There were, perhaps, stupider things <a href="https://twitter.com/DylanByers/status/319906842794942464">said</a> recently than “How did it become so difficult to call a woman good-looking in public?” but I didn't happen to hear them. So congratulations, Dylan Byers of Politico. Your commentary on the president calling California Attorney General Kamala Harris “by far, the best looking attorney general" made my brain hurt.</p><p>It is not "difficult to call a woman good-looking in public," not in a world where women's looks are considered public property, to be commented on, uninvited, whether it's on the street, in a job interview, or in the press. Many people find it quite easy to do, many of them men, and many people who should know better, like Barack Obama.</p><p>This is hardly the first time Obama has been smarmily sexist under the guise of paying a compliment. In the same New York magazine story on Christine Quinn in which Mayor Michael Bloomberg was notoriously quoted saying, "Look at the ass on her," Obama got a pass for a more politely phrased brand of creepiness. According to the piece, Obama <a href="http://nymag.com/news/features/christine-quinn-2013-2/">said</a> to a Republican legislator, 32-year-old Nicole Malliotakis, that she didn't look a day over 23. Quinn promptly joked that Malliotakis should become a Democrat, and the president chimed in, “Come on, honey! I said you’re pretty! I said you look 23!”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/how_to_talk_about_a_womans_looks/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/how_to_talk_about_a_womans_looks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>237</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Twitter to Obama: Commenting on Kamala Harris&#8217; appearance was stupid, sexist</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/04/twitter_to_obama_commenting_on_kamala_harris_appearance_was_stupid_sexist/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/04/twitter_to_obama_commenting_on_kamala_harris_appearance_was_stupid_sexist/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2013 21:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kamala harris]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13262067</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[President Obama called Kamala Harris "by far, the best looking attorney general." It was, by far, the dumbest idea ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In remarks on Thursday, President Obama described California Attorney General Kamala Harris "as by far, the best looking attorney general." If you're not sure why this was sexist (and stupid), please refer to Jamelle Bouie of the American Prospect for clarification:</p><p>[embedtweet id="319921269787197440"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="319921330604605441"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="319921521613209601"]</p><p>Other notables:</p><p>[embedtweet id="319915528254795777"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="319922877073850368"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="319921361244012545"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="319923396127363072"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="319917348809220099"]</p><p>[embedtweet id="319913750457110528"]</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/04/twitter_to_obama_commenting_on_kamala_harris_appearance_was_stupid_sexist/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/04/twitter_to_obama_commenting_on_kamala_harris_appearance_was_stupid_sexist/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York Times: Christine Quinn has a temper</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/26/new_york_times_christine_quinn_has_a_temper/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/26/new_york_times_christine_quinn_has_a_temper/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christine Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York City]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mayor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13252145</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Readers debate: Is the story anti-woman, or pro-not being a terrible person?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a 1,668-word article sparking an array of reactions, the New York Times on Tuesday digs deep into New York mayoral candidate Christine Quinn's temper. (It is a very, very bad temper, the article explains.)</p><p>Reporters Michael Grynbaum and David Chen provide a few lines in the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/26/nyregion/in-private-quinn-displays-a-volatile-side.html?hp&amp;_r=0&amp;pagewanted=all" target="_blank">front-page story</a> to explain that Rudy Giuliani was also a political hothead and that Republican mayoral candidate Joseph J. Lhota once challenged a 77-year-old Holocaust survivor to “be a man.” The rest of the piece includes passages like this:</p><blockquote><p>A session of the <a title="More articles about City Council (New York City)" href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/c/city_council_new_york_city/index.html?inline=nyt-org">New York City Council</a> had descended into chaos, and lawmakers were openly questioning her leadership. Ms. Quinn, the Council speaker, decided there was one person to blame: Betsy Gotbaum, then the city’s public advocate, who had been presiding.</p> <p>The response was sudden and fierce. Ms. Quinn summoned Ms. Gotbaum to an office nearby and, with little warning, began shouting at her in increasingly angry tones about appearing weak in front of other lawmakers.</p> <p>“You were like Bambi in there!” Ms. Quinn exclaimed, slamming her hand on a table for emphasis, according to Ms. Gotbaum, who was on crutches at the time.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/26/new_york_times_christine_quinn_has_a_temper/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/26/new_york_times_christine_quinn_has_a_temper/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pelosi to Salon: They had to take me down</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/22/pelosi_to_salon_they_had_to_take_me_down/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/22/pelosi_to_salon_they_had_to_take_me_down/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2013 18:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nancy Pelosi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women in politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women in Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interview]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13249184</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The House minority leader talks about female leadership and whether the GOP can woo women ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You remember the Republicans' 2010 midterm campaign message: Nancy Pelosi, <a href="http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/23/rnc-head-michael-steele-defends-fiery-anti-pelosi-ad/">engulfed in flames</a>, demon-like. Nancy Pelosi, in charge, bossing you around with her crazy liberal values. An official "Fire Pelosi" bus tour sponsored by the Republican National Committee, and the specter of her leadership <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/10/05/101640/why-do-republicans-love-to-demonize.html">invoked</a> in ad after ad.</p><p>All of this was a key Republican strategy in taking back the House, and while there were lots of reasons the Democrats lost and Pelosi was dethroned, it achieved the desired result. Since the next big electoral battle will be control of the House in 2014, and a Democratic win would presumably put Pelosi back in charge, expect to see more Pelosi boogeyman-ing.</p><p>"It didn't bother me, I figured they thought I was effective and therefore they had to take me down," Pelosi told Salon at the premiere Thursday night of "Fall to Grace," her daughter's HBO documentary on former New Jersey Gov. Jim McGreevey. Still, she worries about the message it sends to other women who might be considering a run.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/22/pelosi_to_salon_they_had_to_take_me_down/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/22/pelosi_to_salon_they_had_to_take_me_down/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>68</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fox affiliate zooms in on breasts for &#8220;Women&#8217;s Day&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/fox_affiliate_apologizes_for_zooming_in_on_womens_breasts_during_womens_day_segment/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/fox_affiliate_apologizes_for_zooming_in_on_womens_breasts_during_womens_day_segment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women's day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Breasts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fox News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women's history month]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13229006</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Connecticut station focused on boobs, then said it was sorry]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fox CT, a Fox News affiliate in Connecticut, is apologizing profusely for its "Women's Day" segment, meant to report on the Women's History Month event taking place at the Capitol. Instead, the news station celebrated women and "women's accomplishments" by airing a video clip zoomed in on nothing but women's breasts.</p><p>After facing significant backlash for the clip, the station sent out <a href="https://twitter.com/FoxCT/status/311900395020623872">this tweet</a> and issued a formal apology, deeming the objectifying footage inappropriate: “The video should never have aired. FOX CT will publicly apologize on today’s newscasts, as well as through our social media platforms. We are also implementing procedures to keep this from happening in the future.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/fox_affiliate_apologizes_for_zooming_in_on_womens_breasts_during_womens_day_segment/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/fox_affiliate_apologizes_for_zooming_in_on_womens_breasts_during_womens_day_segment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Consumer report: Women hate Hooters a little less than they used to</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/consumer_report_women_hate_hooters_a_little_less_than_they_used_to/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/consumer_report_women_hate_hooters_a_little_less_than_they_used_to/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2013 17:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[men]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexuality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hooters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13225342</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new survey finds that the chain's rebranding effort might be working -- but just the littlest bit ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Times have been tough for wing-slinging "breastaurant" chain Hooters. Sales are down, orange hot pants are like <em>so </em>last season and, unfortunately, the chain is no longer the only name in the <a href="http://www.cowgirlsespresso.com/" target="_blank">see-babes-with-your-burger</a> food game.</p><p>In order to stay afloat (like boobs in the ocean), they've undertaken a pretty ambitious rebranding effort. The franchise is hoping that by creating a "<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/18/hooters-redesign_n_2503130.html" target="_blank">sleek and comfortable</a>" environment and adding salads to the menu, they can attract the Chipotle-eating masses and, you know, <em>the womens</em>.</p><p>And it's maybe kind of just a little bit working?</p><p>A new brand index <a href="http://www.brandindex.com/article/hooters-woos-women" target="_blank">report</a> reveals that both men and women have a more positive opinion of Hooters than ever before. But despite minimal gains, the chain remains in hilariously low standing with both genders.</p><p>Still, the report did find that women seem to hate Hooters less than they used to. Researchers asked women to rank their feelings about the restaurant on a score from 100 to -100. In the latest round of surveys, women's impression of Hooters improved from -26 to -21. For men, the chain moved up from -3 to 2.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/consumer_report_women_hate_hooters_a_little_less_than_they_used_to/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/consumer_report_women_hate_hooters_a_little_less_than_they_used_to/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bringing feminist values to the workplace</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/08/inserting_feminisim_into_the_workplace_one_day_at_a_time_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/08/inserting_feminisim_into_the_workplace_one_day_at_a_time_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 19:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feministing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feminism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender Equality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EQUAL RIGHTS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13222904</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For women to gain an equal footing professionally, they have to speak up -- and overcome their "impostor syndrome"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Ed. note: This is guest post by Feministing Editor Emeritus Courtney E. Martin.</em></p><p>On a recent speaking engagement at the <a href="http://will.richmond.edu/">University of Richmond</a>, one anxious senior asked me, “I want to be a professional feminist—do I have to work at a women’s nonprofit? How do you bring your feminism with you into the ‘real world,’ especially if you end up in a work culture where they just don’t get it?”</p><p><a href="http://www.feministing.com"><img align="left" style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/07/feministing_logo-1.jpg" alt="Feministing" /></a> I fear that college students are led to believe that, in order to be dedicated feminists, they have to work for nonprofit organizations specifically devoted to girls and women’s issues or go the academic route. If young women, or young men for that matter, want to go in this direction, more power to them. But there is a lot of valor in braving the kinds of organizations that don’t yet “get it” in this student’s parlance, and agitating for change from within. Audre Lorde warned against the perils of dwelling in “the master’s house,” and yet, there are such rich opportunities there—especially for young people with the energy for some serious remodeling.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/08/inserting_feminisim_into_the_workplace_one_day_at_a_time_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/08/inserting_feminisim_into_the_workplace_one_day_at_a_time_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I&#8217;ll tell you what&#8217;s funny</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/02/ill_tell_you_whats_funny/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/02/ill_tell_you_whats_funny/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 20:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Oscars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Seth MacFarlane]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2013 oscars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oscars 2013]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sarah Silverman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sandra Bernhard]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13216471</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Was Seth MacFarlane's shtick really sexist? Yes, and also no — he fell afoul of the mysterious rules of comedy]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Humor is a complicated phenomenon, and highly dependent on context, as <a href="http://www.salon.com/topic/seth_macfarlane">Seth MacFarlane</a> recently learned. The Oscar host’s much-discussed performance – and in particular his quasi-ironic opening musical number, “We Saw Your Boobs” – has inadvertently launched a cultural debate about several interlocking subjects, including sex and gender in Hollywood, whether p.c. attitudes are destroying humor, and the role of Twitter and other social media during major cultural events. That’s without even getting into the unresolvable and inherently subjective question of what’s funny and what’s not.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/02/ill_tell_you_whats_funny/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/02/ill_tell_you_whats_funny/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>135</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Trashing Sheryl Sandberg</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/02/trashing_sheryl_sandberg/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/02/trashing_sheryl_sandberg/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2013 17:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sheryl Sandberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lean In]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Feminism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13216933</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Facebook exec’s feminist critics seem to say that if you can’t solve everyone’s problems, don’t solve anyone’s]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That Sheryl Sandberg is one crafty lady. The shockingly negative early reaction to her book “Lean In: Women, Work and the Will to Lead” only proves one of its central points: Boy, do we hate uppity women! Well played, Madam!</p><p>Except the famous Facebook COO is the opposite of uppity, personality-wise (look away from her wealth and privilege for just a moment, if you can. It’s hard, but try.) In fact, the only thing I didn’t like about “Lean In” is the way she constantly reassured us that she knows our objections to her argument, and they bother her. If you took out her caveats and provisos -- that she respects stay-at-home mothers and knows she writes from the pinnacle of privilege and is aware her advice might not help a single mother in a minimum wage job and understands that many women don’t aspire to climb the corporate ladder and she doesn’t judge <em>anyone</em>, except probably Hitler -- the book would be at least a quarter shorter, and a better read.</p><p>Sandberg needs someone to write a book that says: No matter how you layer in apologies for not writing an entirely different book, a book that will help every single person on the planet, people will savage you for it, anyway. Maybe she’ll do that next.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/02/trashing_sheryl_sandberg/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/02/trashing_sheryl_sandberg/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>72</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Racism and sexism are killing the U.S. economy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/01/how_racism_and_sexism_are_net_drains_on_the_u_s_economy_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/01/how_racism_and_sexism_are_net_drains_on_the_u_s_economy_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AlterNet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minorities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social injustice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13215799</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Economists see discrimination as a form of economic inefficiency -- and a massive misallocation of human resources]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Discrimination isn’t just an insult to our most basic notions of fairness. It also costs us money, because those who are discriminated against are unable to make the best use of their talents. This not only hurts them, it hurts us all, as some of our best and brightest players are, in essence, sidelined, unable to make their full contributions to our economy.</p></blockquote><blockquote><p>Over the past half century, America has made considerable strides in reducing discrimination against women and racial minorities. But recent research suggests that we still have a long way to go. What’s even worse: Progress against discrimination – particularly racial discrimination — seems to have largely stalled out. And there are signs that other forms of discrimination are getting worse. -<em>-<a href="http://business.time.com/2013/02/19/discrimination-doesnt-make-dollars-or-sense/">David Futrelle, Time Magazine</a></em></p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.alternet.org"><img align="left" style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://images.salon.com/img/partners/ID_alternetInline.jpg" alt="AlterNet" /></a> The struggle against social injustice is fueled by a narrative of moral appeals. The logic of good guys vs bad guys, and how the long arc of justice inevitably bends true is compelling and beautiful. In appealing to the heart, the hope is that the mind, and the body politic, will inevitably be moved in the direction of the Common Good, and towards a set of forward thinking and evolved public policies</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/01/how_racism_and_sexism_are_net_drains_on_the_u_s_economy_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/01/how_racism_and_sexism_are_net_drains_on_the_u_s_economy_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>