B and B

Don't ignore the effects of gender bias

The San Antonio Express-News published a letter of mine today, in response to this article from last Sunday's paper.  The article focused on women re-entering the workforce after taking several years off the care for their kids.  For my letter, they used a title "Show both sides," but a better title would be "Don't ignore the effects of gender bias."  Here is the letter:

I am writing to comment on the article by Melissa Fletcher Stoeltje, "Opting Back In."

I applaud the Express-News for taking on such a complex subject, but I was disappointed the author did not discuss the crucial role gender bias has on the work-related choices that families face.

The phrases "opting in" and "opting out" imply free choice, yet the reality for many women who enter or leave the workforce has nothing to do with choice. For the majority of families, simple economics dictates that the parent who can make the most money works and, if possible, the other parent stays home and takes care of the children.

Since, on average, women earn only about eighty cents for every dollar a man earns, most of the parents who "opt out" are women. If the tables were turned, we would be talking about men "opting out" rather than women.

Also, the article overplays a small number of positive stories of women who have succeeded at returning to the workforce, while downplaying a "rigorous survey" that suggests the reality for those who pursue this course is far less encouraging: only three-quarters of highly-qualified women who desire to return to work actually succeed, and less than half at a full-time job.

The author should have devoted much more attention to this other side of the story. Why can't these women find work appropriate for their skills?

Isn't it far more newsworthy when qualified people cannot find appropriate work?

While it may feel better in the short run to ignore the ongoing realities of gender discrimination in the workplace, it does not serve your readers well to give short shrift to this crucial factor affecting the choices of women and their families.

Lake Teshekpuk vs Bush and Big Oil -- the saga continues

Desipte setbacks, the oil-industry and their puppets in the Bush administration are continuing their pursuit of an area in far north-central Alaska owned by the people of the United States--an area that is a crucial habitat area for migratory birds--an area separate from, and perhaps even more important, than the famous Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to its east.

"The area (Teshekpuk Lake) is one of the most important areas in the entire Arctic, and I don't just mean in Arctic Alaska," said Stan Senner, executive director of Audubon Alaska. "It is simply the most important goose-molting area in the Arctic."

We first noted this story back in early 2006.  Jaded Thea, at her blog, reminds us that this is story is far from over.  What has happened since then is summed up by the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner:

In January 2006, the BLM approved a plan opening the sensitive area around Teshekpuk Lake to limited oil and gas drilling. The plan restricted the number of leases in the area, the overall acreage developed, and the time of year when work could be done.

Leases were included in an NPR-A lease sale scheduled for Sept. 27.

But shortly before the sale, a federal judge sided with environmental groups, including the Fairbanks-based Northern Alaska Environmental Center, and blocked the sale of leases in the northeast planning area. The judge claimed the BLM had not sufficiently accounted for cumulative impacts associated with development in the neighboring northwest planning area.

In November, the Bureau announced it would develop a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to address cumulative impacts, and it put out a call for “specific … recommendations as to stipulations, operating procedures, and other mitigating measures that the BLM could consider to further its goal of reducing impacts.”

Wilson said the supplemental was originally expected out in June and will be released soon.

“We’re just adding new information, revising information based on new information, and then addressing the concerns of the court,” she said. Among other things, the new document will take into account a recent assessment of public health concerns.

The BLM is considering a number of alternatives for development, but has not given up plans to allow drilling around Teshekpuk Lake, according to Wilson.

At the same time, we are now learning that coastal erosion in this area of far northern Alaska is accelerating, perhaps due to the warming climate.  From a separate article in the Daily News-Miner: 

Taken together, drilling and erosion would create a “double whammy for the sensitive goose molting and caribou calving and insect-relief habitats,” wrote [Pamela] Miller [of the Northern Alaska Environmental Center], a former wildlife biologist, in an e-mail.

The Northern Alaska Environmental Center looks like a good place to go for more information on this ongoing saga.

Express-News features Texas state parks

The Express-News has much of their Sunday Travel section devoted to Texas state parks this week, including profiles of two specific parks:  Pedernales Falls in the Hill Country north of San Antonio, and Palo Duro Canyon in far, far northwest Texas.  The former I've been to a few times; the latter I've never been to since I can't figure out a convenient way or time to get up to Amarillo.  The idea of this spectacular and rugged canyon in the middle of the drearily monotonous plains is intruiging. 

The newspaper plans to do further profiles of the remaining parks, so this will apparently be an ongoing feature for quite some time.

Other articles in yesterday's paper include The state of our state parks and New Texas state parks funds prompt call for repairs, more staff.

Of course, whle reading about our parks may be enjoyable, actually going to them is even more so. Sometimes it just doesn't work out, though.  Last weekend we tried to visit South Llano River State Park, near Junction, a couple hours west of here--a park in an area that is part Hill Country and part West Texas.  We hadn't been there since shortly after we moved to this area more than eight years ago. 

But thanks to all the rain that we've been having, the river was a bit high, and covered the low water crossing of the road that enters the park.  So the park was closed to all for the July 4 holiday.  Fortunately, thanks to the new funding for our parks system, we don't have to worry about it being closed for good eventually.  So we'll have to try again soon.

In freeing Libby, Bush sinks lower than even I imagined he could

I've spent much of the last few days in rural Kimble County, escaping the pressures of everyday life and news of our nation's affaris.  But this retreat was rudely interrupted yesterday when I happened to involuntarily glance at the headlines of the San Antonio Express-News inside a vending machine:  President Bush has given his convicted crony Scooter Libby a get-out-of-jail card, before Libby has even gone to jail for the crime of lying to a grand jury.

I know many expected something like this, sooner or later, but for some reason I did not.  Yet I should know by now to never make the mistake of assuming Bush will take a high road, when the low, disgraceful road will make his life easier. 

Sadly, but not surprisingly, there appear to be many defeding this shameful action--the subversion of our system of justice in the name of helping a President cover up actions and potential crimes of those around him.  These people deserve to be pushed to the fringes of public debate in this country.  But with the state of the corporate media in this country, the odds of that are slim to none.