Photo by Charlotte at flickr.

As a feminist and an activist, I deal with a lot of ignorant and hateful people. When I tell people that I am a Women’s Studies major, I either get an eye roll or a lecture on how it is a useless area of academics. Recently, Miranda posted a great piece that touched a few buttons of men in the comment section. They don’t think men can stop rape. It was typical: nasty “you little ladies do not know what’s what and I (a self considered highly intelligent superior male) have to educate you in the error of your ways” thing, and it got me thinking about people who oppose actions taken in the movement against sexual assault/abuse/rape of women. Opponents of preventive education, anti-rape education, and ending violence against women and the social tendency to blame survivors often focus on three main myths:

1. That few women are victims of sexual assault/rape/abuse.
2. That people who are survivors of sexual violence are ever, in any way, at fault or instigators of the violence.
3. That rape cannot occur in a relationship or with someone with whom the victim has had sex with before.

If you have been reading this blog than you are well aware of this, hopefully. Getting this across to some people, however, proves problematic. It is quite disheartening at times. I do get frustrated- and at times think what is the point? Why bother when obviously some people will not change?

But some people do change. People learn and grow and get new perspectives every day. It has dawned on me that I am an activist because I believe that people can change. If I did not, there would be no reason to blog or organize or protest. And so I want to build on  a recent trend in our pieces here of leaving you with the impetus to do more, to bring about action. We will be highlighting more this September and from now on about local and national movements to end sexual violence, empower survivors, and share voices.

People change- and I believe that myths can be destroyed.

Kim: Some of you may have noticed that two weeks ago, Kate Ruin announced she was stepping away from Doin’ It Well. Geographical distance and involvement in other social justice activities have sadly pulled her away from the column we created. She is missed!

But don’t worry, faithful readers: I have recruited another awesome co-author, Ross Wantland. I am totally excited to continue Doin’ It Well with him.

Ross: Hello readers! I am overjoyed to join Kim Rice in this writing venture. A little about me: For the past 10 years, I have been doing sexual and domestic violence prevention work in this community. Currently, I work with a lot with men to help us as men understand our own role in preventing violence against women. Because of my work, folks sometimes get confused and believe that because I am anti-rape, then I’m somehow anti-sex. Actually, I think sex is great, and I enjoy talking about sexual health. Sex is wonderful and healthy. We’re not born innately knowing everything about it and we all could use some assistance to help us navigate the murky waters of sexuality in our society. I am looking forward to answering your questions and providing you with information to keep you (and us) Doin’ It Well.

When we talk with women about their sexuality, we notice that many women have a difficult time being in touch with, celebrating, and truly owning their own sexual identities. Women are often taught that their sexuality is for the benefit of someone else, usually men. Although we will explore the reasons for this in later columns, it led us to brainstorm a list of women’s sexual rights, or affirmations. Maybe women and men will cut this column out and post it on their refrigerators, in their bedrooms or on their bathroom mirrors, replacing the usual affirmations on post-it notes that say things like “you are a good person” with this Women’s Sexual Bill of Rights.

Sex 411: Women’s Sexual Bill of Rights
Women have the right to sexual pleasure
Women have the right to their own bodies and a right to touch their bodies for pleasure
Women have the right to sexual expression without the consequence of harassment or sexual violence
Women have the right to reproductive health choices that affect their bodies
Women have the right to say yes to sex
Women have the right to initiate sexual activity
Women have the right to begin sexual exploration and activity at a time that feels OK and desirable to them, which may be earlier or later than what parents, religions, society or partners are comfortable with
Women have the right to prevent pregnancy and to enjoy sexual activity for the pleasure it provides
Women have the right to ask for the type of sexual stimulation they want
Women have the right to be the experts about their own bodies and about how they liked to be touched
Women have the right to teach their partners how, where and when they like to be touched
Women have the right to bring condoms on dates and request that their partners wear them on penises or dildos
Women have the right to mutually satisfying, respectful sexual encounters
Women have the right to look at, explore, touch, massage and play with their bodies, including their genitals
Women have the right to feel horny and to experience sexual frustration (“blue ovaries”)
Women have the right to experience love, sex and intimacy in physical, emotional and spiritual ways with other women, men and anyone in between
Women have the right to heal from the trauma and abuse inflicted upon them and to enjoy sexual lives that are satisfying and fulfilling
Women have the right to love other women openly
Women have the right to expect to experience orgasm during sex
Women have the right to understand and be with partners who understand that female sexuality, anatomy and functioning are different from men’s and equally important and valid
Women have the right to live in a world free of sexual violence

As the editor of Where Is Your Line?, I have often written about the unique power of the internet and the bold approach of THE LINE campaign takes toward contributing to various conversations with a loud voice about ending sexual violence, empowering people through their sexuality, and beginning conversations on sex and relationships that have never before been started.

Today, I am writing to unveil more powerful voices. THE LINE campaign is centered in this blog, and we know how important voices and the action of speaking out can be. And so, THE LINE is building a blogroll, and we want to use it to give you more: more coverage of information you care about, more frequent updates on people and situations we care about, and more variation of topics in our own blogging cycle. We want to talk to you here more frequently, and we want to give you the ability to trace our information – and more – through our blogroll.

As we develop our list of authors and organizations to listed to, we’re looking for submissions- from you.

Tell us in the comments below what you want us to be reading- your own personal blogs, your favorite news sites, your favorite organization news feeds. If you think it’s important, we do, too, and we’d like to include it. You can get insight into what we’re reading in the archives and via our twitter feed. When we post the list, you’ll be able to see it here – and submit quick! We’re hoping to post it within the next week.

Thanks for being involved. We’re looking forward to hearing from you.

This summer, I gained a new perspective on relationships and women’s empowerment. There are two main reasons for the feminist thoughts in my head – a teacher and the internet.

In the beginning of summer, I was talking to a teacher about relationships and the term “whipped.” (I had told her stories about friends who had let their partners control their every move because they felt that they were “too in love to care.”) Being the amazing teacher she is, she said:

“You have the vagina in this relationship. A man needs you. Regardless if it is for sex, love, or procreation.”

As raunchy as it may be, it’s true: it takes two to have a successful relationship (or more, depending on your own style). There must always be a division of power in order to have a relationship, and when your partner begins controlling every move, it’s more of an imprisonment. When people respect each other, the foundation is set for a strong partnership.

Later on this summer, I stumbled on a lot of photos by my female friends on Facebook with captions like “I was so drunk I don’t know why I did it,” “Last night was so much fun, I can’t remember a thing,” or “it’s okay- I only do this when I am drunk.” I found this slightly worrisome. I have done some things that I would never do unless I was intoxicated, but I try not to blame it on the alcohol. The situation, and how uncomfortable reading comments like those was, really got me thinking about how partying, sex, and victim-blaming centered on alcohol consumption have created a dangerous culture for sex, one in which many people may be using alcohol as an excuse for seeking out the sex they want (and, similarly, a culture in which drinking disqualifies many of our experiences as survivors of sexual assault). Why were women doing this online? What were they trying to express about their decisions? A part of me felt that they were ashamed and using alcohol as an alibi or a cover-up, so that they didn’t have to be responsible for the decisions they may have made. But why? If they were seeking pleasure, they don’t need to be ashamed.

As summer ends, I am still thinking about these big ideas and what they mean for my own life. I took the opportunity to formulate a Bill of Rights for women this September. Whether you’re in the classroom or the boardroom this fall, I hope you’re interested in living a life full of pleasure, independence, and support. My guidelines?

• As women, we have the right to have fun.
• As women, we will not feel embarrassed about or ashamed of what makes us happy.
• As women, we do not need the attention or ‘approval’ of others to be confident.
• As women, we will love ourselves inside and out, regardless of the size of our skinny jeans.
• As women, we will communicate our opinions with confidence and enthusiasm.
• As women, we will love our history and embrace the fight to empower all women.
• As women, we will always try our hardest to reinforce the fact that we are capable of anything.

Men Can Stop Rape poster via TCADSV.

Here’s a scenario:  I’m out to dinner with a group of sophisticated, professional-type couples.  Someone asks me what I do and everyone politely pauses to listen to my response.  I respond that I’m a rape crisis intervention counselor and advocate for rape victim’s rights, and I can literally watch 50% of the group turn off, click, and nonchalantly start to chat amongst themselves about something else.  Meanwhile, the rest of the table will either make sympathetic sounds, perplexedly question why I would choose to “spend my time doing that,” or get wide-eyed and stare at me like I’ve cornered them and they’re planning an exit strategy.

The second group is usually comprised of the women.  The first group – the group of people that seems to think the topic of rape is irrelevant to their lives – consists of men.

By and large, rape prevention education is targeted towards girls and women, implying that rape is a “woman’s issue” and therefore, of no concern for boys.  This strategy has the damaging auxiliary effects of: 1) promoting the antiquated and dangerous belief that a woman is solely responsible for putting on the breaks during sexual activity, 2) communicating to boys and men that they need not concern themselves with such frivolous matters as consent, mutual fulfillment or sexual autonomy, and 3) thereby condoning sexual violence because, you know, boys will be boys.

What we need is a more holistic and comprehensive strategy to end rape.  And it starts with men speaking out and stepping up.  To be clear, I’m not suggesting paternalism- I’m talking about being a decent person and not letting your buddies step out of line.  A groundbreaking study by psychologists David Lisak and Paul Miller provides a lot of compelling reasons as to why this is necessary.

Lisak and Miller interviewed almost 2,000 male college students about their sexual behavior, hoping to gain some insight into the frequency of rape.  They found that, out of the men interviewed, only about 6% admitted to raping.  But out of those men, about 76% admitted to repeatedly raping at an average of about 6 rapes per person.  And 4% of the men surveyed committed over 400 rapes and over 1,000 violent acts between them.

So what we have here is a very small group of the population that commits the vast majority of rapes and otherwise violent acts against intimate partners (ie, slapping or choking).  But the most significant finding is that most rapists are serial rapists.  What this means for men is that, if you think that someone has done it once, chances are that person will do it again – and again, and again.  If we can get past blaming the victim or pretending that it’s none of your business or that it’s just a matter of good guys making bad decisions, and if we can really focus on the fact that men who rape are criminals and predators, I think that our society can stop rape.

Amazingly, the research also suggests that men who rape don’t think that what they’re doing is rape.  When the men surveyed were asked questions like, “Have you ever had sexual intercourse with someone, even though they did not want to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist your sexual advances,” they’d answer “yes” as long as the word “rape” wasn’t in there.  Lisak spoke to CBS News about his 20 years worth of interviews:

“A lot of these men, especially the serial rapists, are very, very narcissistic, there is nothing they enjoy more than to sit down in a room with a guy like me and impress me with all their sexual exploits. And that’s how they view them.”

Rape doesn’t happen in a vacuum.  It is perpetuated, justified and promoted by a culture that rejects the idea of women’s humanity.  Every time you encourage or sit silently through a story about some “sexual exploit,” you’re contributing to this culture at the expense of women everywhere.  Rape will not stop until we successfully teach our men that the systematic abuse and denigration of women is not a necessary, joyful component of manhood.

And who can deliver that message better than men themselves?

Photo via the Dr. Laura Program.

Dr. Laura, the “Number 1 Female Radio Talk Show Host” in America, is in trouble for her recent behavior on-air. When a woman named Jade called in to her show, it began a series of troubling, awkward, and-in the words of Dr. Laura herself- disturbing series of racially-charged events.

Starcasm reported:

Dr. Laura Schlessinger is in a whole lot of hot water after she repeatedly used the N-word while talking with a caller during her August 10 radio show.

The profanity insanity began when a woman called asking for help with her husband’s friends. She explained that she was black and her husband was white and that his friends often said racist things or pretended she wasn’t even there. Dr. Laura asked for examples and the caller said they often asked her “Oh, well, how do you black people like doing this?” and “Do black people really like doing that?”

Dr. Laura cut her off and said she didn’t believe that was racist. The caller eventually asked about the use of the n-word and Dr. Laura responded with the argument that the N-word was used all the time on HBO and that it was OK for black people to say it but not white people, which she thought was irrational. But, Dr. Laura didn’t say “N-word” she actually used the N-word! Repeatedly!

As you might expect, the caller was rather taken aback and it only got worse from there as Dr. Laura jumped up on a precarious soapbox, sharing her opinions on Barack Obama, “black-think” and the NAACP!

The transcript is available at the earlier link.

The blogosphere has been alive since the incident. Bloggers and activists everywhere are upset and troubled by the remarks. But everyone has forgotten about Jade: the woman who called for advice in the first place on what appears to be a troubling relationship. I wanted to answer Jade’s question:

Jade,

Your husband and his friends are out of line. You cannot summarize ANY group into a stereotype- I am concerned as to why they think that you should be the representative for an entire race. It seems a bit outrageous, but the fact that you and your husband fell in love and got married says to me that he is not a “hopeless case.” But he does not understand how offensive he and his friends are being, and it’s clear- so I would bring it up to him and simply state that although he might not see it that way, the questions and comments being directed to you are offensive. You do not speak for your whole race, and every member of your race does not agree exactly on all topics. Explain to him that it hurts your feelings, and that it is starting to make you question your relationship with him:  he should love you and respect your feelings. I mean, if he is like this with you, how would he be towards your children (assuming you have children or plan on having children)? His attitudes toward race are a joke, and this is something that needs to be dealt with now before it escalates and gets out of hand.

Do not keep quiet. Do not let it slide. Do not feel guilty. You deserve to be respected by your husband and his friends.

Photo via foundphotoslj on Flickr.

A new report, entitled “Sex and School: Adolescent Sexual Intercourse and Education,” is making huge waves in headlines. The study, completed by Bill McCarthy of the University of California Davis and Eric Grodsky of the University of Minnesota (two sociologists, I might add), collected data on youth intercourse, romantic and nonromantic, and youth performance in school.

Some research-style background: the study looked at school attachment, high school GPA, college aspiration, college expectations, problems in school, ever truant, the number of days truant, school sanctions (suspended/expelled), and dropping out. The research was completed with the intention of describing intercourse- which the researchers believe means the survey was primarily completed by those involved in the act of vaginal intercourse. Participants were allowed to self-identify as being in romantic or nonromantic relationships, and were responsible for making the distinction.

If you’ve read some mainstream coverage of the report, you’re probably very confounded by the data: people in relationships and people who abstain from sex do just fine in school (or, at least, do not find that intercourse disturbs their existing patterns academically) and people who hook up simply don’t? That can’t be!

Well, you are right. It isn’t.

Oliver Wang of The Atlantic explains where the coverage went wrong concisely in his article on the report:

Here’s an age-old beef between scientists (social or otherwise) and journalists: the former tend to be exceptionally careful about drawing conclusions from their research. It’s one thing to argue, “Data X and Data Y show a relationship,” it’s another thing altogether to actually argue, “Data X is the cause of Data Y.” This is what’s known as the correlation vs. causality distinction and it is absolutely fundamental to any kind of responsible research methodology and discussion.

The difference between a correlation and a cause may seem minor- after all, why not jump the bridge of conclusions and just make a statement, already?! – but it isn’t. Social scientists would not claim something was a cause if really, data was just correlated. Similarly, they would never call a cause a correlation if it was clear that causality existed. Such is science: you say what is scientifically and methodologically true.

And this is why everyone should actually be reading this report – instead of the coverage. (And why the journalists should pick up a copy, too.) Heather Corrina’s coverage of the report for Scarleteen elaborates on that fine distinction, and why the scientists themselves are not ready to make claims, about hooking up or its effects on student’s academic performance:

This study also can’t tell us much about the academic impact of “hookups” or “flings,” since it doesn’t talk about them nor were those terms used in the study, and adults reporting or classifying teen nonromantic relationships as such may be projecting or making unwarranted assumptions about teens’ nonromantic relationships in doing so. We cannot say what types of romantic or nonromantic relationships intercourse occurred in in the study. All one can state with authority is that the individuals in them either classified them as romantic or non-romantic and/or did or did not mark relationships as meeting the criteria in the list above. Some of the intercourse reported as non-romantic may well have occurred, and probably did occur, in “casual sex” contexts like one-night stands. However, some may have occurred in friends-with-benefits scenarios, via open romantic relationships, or in brand-new relationships which the participants did not yet engage in the above behaviours or don’t yet classify as romantic, or other possibilities. But to classify the non-romantic sex as being about any one kind of relationship, beyond merely non-romantic, is poor reporting and is not supported by the study.

The authors do not ever, in presenting their results, use the word “cause” to connect sex & academic outcomes – they use “relationship” or “association” or “correlation.” This study does NOT show that any kind of sex causesanything to do with academic outcomes, only that some academic outcomes or attitudes do or do not occur when teens are also having intercourse or not having intercourse in certain contexts. Something else McCarthy explained to me was that “the GPA and other outcome data are form the subsequent year so they do have temporal order and correct for selection into sex; however,that selection is not random so we can’t really talk about cause.”

The truth about hooking up and school is that nobody knows how hooking up will effect our performance in the classroom, because that isn’t what this study was about. But in the coverage of the piece, it has become obvious that preconceived notions about sexuality and relationships are present in the pens of journalists.

I may not be a scientist, but I’d like to make some suggestions based on the findings of this report: get some, and get smart.

1. The person wants you to act unintelligent- This person might or might not appreciate your individual intelligence, but the end goal is they want you to know how much smarter they are than you, and they want other people to know, too. This is someone who undermines your opinion and intelligence. They are assholes. These actions can lower your self esteem and make you second guess every little thought and action.

2. The person attempts to keep you from spending time elsewhere- This is actually an all-too-common occurrence: how many of us give up friends and family, even temporarily or only slightly, for a new flame? A lot of us have, and many of us could name friends who have sort of drifted after beginning a new tryst. There is a difference, however, between being pre-occupied with a new romance and the person you are with trying to isolate you from people who care about you. This is a classic red flag of an abuser: they want you to be completely isolated and in their control.

3. They only show interest in physicality- I tend to like it when people acknowledge the fact that I have a brain and personality. Some guys treat me like a trophy or new toy, and it’s disconcerting. I understand flattery, but sometimes it’s hard to believe there’s anything underneath.

Photo via Robert Vitulano on Flickr.

From time to time I like to browse on Cosmopolitan’s online website for various reasons. The other night I came upon an article about breaking the cycles of toxic relationships:

“We were shocked when we heard that the first guy Rihanna seriously dated after Chris Brown had been accused of domestic abuse by an ex-girlfriend. After everything she went through, it would seem as if she’d be repulsed by men with that kind of reputation.

Turns out, the opposite is more likely to be true. “Most of us have a relationship pattern — that same type of guy we keep falling for — and it can work for or against us,” says couples therapist Deborah Dunn, author of Stupid About Men. “It’s not uncommon for women to keep going back to the type that wronged them in the past.” How do you change whom you’re drawn to dating? It’s not easy, but it starts with figuring out where your attraction to these guys came from in the first place. …

All guys have less-than-admirable moments, but there are major tip-offs that your type is bad for you. Consistently feeling worse about yourself as you become more involved with a boyfriend is a giveaway that something isn’t right, says Diana Kirschner, PhD, author of Love in 90 Days. Other red flags: feeling like you have to walk on eggshells around a guy and dropping everything to spend time with him even though he’s proven he wouldn’t do the same for you. And while only you know what your relationships are really like, pay attention if your friends and family disapprove of every man you date, says Gratch.

To alter whom you’re attracted to, you need to believe that what you’ve experienced isn’t how love has to or should be, says Dunn. Ask friends who are happy in their relationships to describe how their guy behaves toward them so you can hear what you’re missing out on. Or if you’re coming off yet another bad breakup, consider seeing a therapist to make peace with the guy who originally wronged you, recommends Kirschner. For extra motivation, picture what your life could be like in 10 years if you’re still choosing men who treat you badly versus men who will care for you in a positive way. Which future do you want?”

After reading this article, I immediately thought about the recent discussions about the “Love the Way you Lie” video by Eminem and Rihanna. I, like Melissa D., was not completely shocked and appalled by the video. Growing up, I have seen many men abuse the women in their lives: my uncle went to jail for physically hurting his wife, and as his children grew up, many of them followed the same path. The oldest of the bunch went to prison for robbery and attempted murder, while the others either became pregnant or developed substance addictions.

I was always taught by my family that if you choose to defend yourself in any situation, you must be able to deal with the consequences- regardless if it led to any physical violence. My brother had a drug addiction and his mood would change constantly- while under the influence, he would often pick fights with me, and I was always the headstrong type, so I naturally argued back with him. He would hurt me, but my parents chose to ignore it because they believed in keeping family issues private and felt I should be obedient, as a woman. I chose to keep my mouth shut instead of speaking up, from that time on.

Looking back at my high school years, I realized that in every relationship that I was in, I always tried to please my partner regardless of their choices and preferences. I always felt immediate attraction to those who were sweet and nice, but when I began a relationship with them, I began to see the negative. (However, I still believed that the “sweet and nice” guy would somehow appear again.)

This article is right in asking, “what future do you want?” We must picture the women we want to be and strive for it. Having a relationship is a beautiful experience, but you must be able to see yourself without anyone else: to have a strong relationship, you must strive to be strong, and always prioritize your health and happiness above all else.

Photo via Fox News.

Jennifer Aniston’s new film, “Switch,” is a tale with a provocative beginning: a turkey baster. Her character in the movie uses artificial insemination to have a child alone. That’s right – alone. No boyfriend, no, girlfriend, no partner, no husband, no wife.

“Switch” is about a single mother (and, even though it is a love story, attempts to encompass the theme of choosing to be a mother, alone). For real. And that’s why Aniston did it. In a recent interview, she said:

“Love is love and family is what is around you and who is in your immediate sphere. That is what I love about this movie. It is saying it is not the traditional sort of stereotype of what we have been taught as a society of what family is.”

It’s important that we realize, firstly, that pregnancy, motherhood, and sexuality are closely related. The same gender injustices that plague the openly sexual, the sexually “deviant,” and those affected by sexual violence also impact our understanding and cultural perception of pregnant and parenting women.

And single mothers are always under attack: reports each day, month, and year blame children’s drug addictions, killing habits, and gang violence on single-parent families; the government is constantly snipping away at the economic security of women who aren’t dependent on men, but do need assistance (and recently cut diapers from the Food Stamps list); and now, Bill O’Reilly has some choice words for Aniston and “Switch.” According to ABC News, he thinks Aniston’s film is to blame for destroying the “American Family.”

In O’Reilly’s eyes, Aniston’s comments make her a threat to the American family.

“She’s throwing a message out to 12-year-olds and 13-year-olds that ‘Hey, you don’t need a guy. You don’t need a dad.’ That is destructive to our society,” he said on Tuesday’s “O’Reilly Factor.”

Fox News contributor Margaret Hoover and Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson chimed in on the topic, agreeing with O’Reilly that teens and tweens can’t understand the difference between a mature woman raising a child on her own (Aniston is 41) and a teen having a baby.

“She is glamorizing single parenthood,” Carlson said.

As usual, I’m going to break this down for you: Bill O’Reilly, a conservative white dude from who-cares-where America with a talk show and a sexual harassment suit under his belt, thinks that the film “Switch,” a light-hearted piece about single parenthood starring a fully adult woman, is going to destroy the American family, encourage teen pregnancy, and diminish the importance of fatherhood. He also asserted this while giving single moms about .05 percent of that screen time, filling it with lip service about how “abandoned” mothers do great things every day (presumably, like finding new husbands).

To that, I have much to say.

I was raised by a single mother from the age of four on. This has made me appreciate the importance of love in families, of close-knit and open families, of talking and of appreciating the ones you’re with. I am hardworking because my mother was hardworking, and how: she works a  humble job and sent my brother and I to immensely prestigious private colleges, all with relatively no money or power to ease our growth. We grew up simple and humble. We studied hard and we had a lot of support and a strong sense of values. We are ambitious and intelligent. We stand head-and-shoulders above many of our peers from married families.

My father, on the other hand, is about as in-tune with my family as Bill O’Reilly himself. Normally, this isn’t something I talk about or throw out there, but it’s necessary now. Right now. Right when movies are finally being made that don’t show single mothers shooting drugs and fucking up their lives. Right when actresses who are single adults are unafraid to admit that they will still pursue families. Right when the stigma and shame of being a single parent remains threatened by people like Bill O’Reilly- by straight, white dudes who treat women like shit and want to ensure that all families make room for men, no matter how violent or unloving those men are.

Bill O’Reilly said that single mothers do great things. He was right. Single parents, and especially single mothers, do great things every day. But Bill O’Reilly doesn’t mean it, and he should. I’m interested in how many of the following things O’Reilly knows: that single mothers on welfare complete their Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees, JD’s and Ph.D.’s every day; that single mothers feed entire families while working full-time jobs, often without a hitch; and that when there are hitches, single moms everywhere have proven, year after year and budget cuts after budget cuts, that they have no time to wait on anyone else, and that they will accomplish what they need to – no matter what the time spent, effort involved, or obstacles thrown.

As someone who has been working to empower women in her local communities for some time (not a long time, but certainly longer than Bill O’Reilly), it is hard for me to watch anyone incorrectly summarize what empowerment looks like. There are many routes to empowering women – especially single mothers, who are caught at many intersections of oppression.

For example, single mothers are going to be more likely to be poor than married women, no matter how many children those married women have. Why? The wage gap. If women are already paid less than men, how can women without men in their lives even dream of competing on equal footing? So we need economic empowerment: financial literacy, equal pay, flex-time, and family-friendly workplaces that do not punish working parents.

Similarly, teen mothers (who, unbeknownst to panelists on the O’Reilly Factor, become adult women in no time) face hurdles in completing their educations, and therefore often slip into poverty. So we need educational empowerment: equal access to educational resources, increased scholarships, outreach to women in non-traditional fields of interest, and networking opportunities for everyone in the working world.

Lastly, single mothers also need supports that all women, regardless of familial status, need: cultural equality, healthy and non-violent relationships, workplaces that embrace female leadership, and full equality under the law.

It is hard to believe that “Switch” will actually destroy the American Family, but it may change some minds. It is giving single mothers a voice, and it may alter the way we, as a culture, perceive women who raise children by themselves. It may help us understand their unique situations and it will finally give people everywhere the chance to applaud their accomplishments. And that, I daresay, is not dangerous. Rather, I think it is very important.

It is also hard to believe that “Switch” is going to convince anyone that fatherhood is unimportant. It is hard to believe women at any time in our current economic and cultural state will choose to embark on a road of discrimination and oppression that is known as “single parenthood.” But it is just as hard to imagine that the problems women face have a solution called “fathers” or “husbands.” The solution is empowerment, and the ability to be heard.

Bill O’Reilly may work for a television network, but he’s tuned out to the realities of single motherhood – and it’s offensive.