First-time filmmaker, 70-year-old Mary Ann Smothers Bruni, has made it her mission to bring visibility to honor killing in Iraqi Kurdistan. Within that context, her documentary highlights the advocacy of women who are catalyzing change in the region.

Bruni, a journalist and photographer, established herself in Turkey in 1985.  During April of 1991, she “walked up a mountain above Turkey” and into Iraq, where she joined two million Kurds who were fleeing the reprisals of Saddam Hussein—the result of their failed uprising. For the following three years, Bruni recorded her experiences in Iraqi Kurdistan. Her goal was to make a series of films about the women in the north and their success stories in rebuilding their country.  She and her team shot over 500 hours of footage capturing daily life in the locality.  They conducted interviews with a wide range of women including judges, physicians, politicians, and poets.

However, something unexpected happened when Bruni and her crew were on the ground.  They became aware of the wave of honor killings that were taking place, and the activist women who were fighting back.  Bruni redirected her focus to reflect that story.

The narrative follows the efforts of the Women’s Media Center of Sulaymaniyah, which was founded in 1997. Runak Rauf, an indomitable woman in her sixties, established the center and is currently the director. Rauf is known for the march of women she led in 1994, traveling 150 miles to demonstrate for an end to the acrimonious civil war. Rauf publishes the newspaper Rewan, which reports on vital women’s concerns. She has led the Center in cooperating with the local Kurdish Regional Government to investigate violence against women.

At the nucleus of the Center’s operations are Runak Faraj and Kalthum Murad Ibrahim.  Faraj, the editor of Rewan, explains that when one of her students died as the result of an honor killing, her life was changed. Ibrahim left school after the sixth grade to help her mother in the house—like many Kurdish girls.  The daughter of a mullah, her father treated her as an equal to her brothers. Ibrahim was brought up in an environment devoted to aiding others, and often observed people coming to her father for assistance.  Respected in the town of Rania due to her lineage, she is recognized as being knowledgeable about the local people.  She started as a volunteer for the Women’s Media Center, and later joined as a staff member.  The film follows the two women in their daily and often dangerous work of rooting out the perpetrators of violence against women.  They joke, with a subtext of ominous anxiety, that perhaps one day it will be their dead bodies that will be recovered.

The account begins with a phone call to the Center from Police Chief Abudallah.  A woman’s body has been found in a field near Rania—a border town where Iraq, Iran, and Turkey abut.  Faraj and Ibrahim join him on-site, to observe the place where the murder occurred.  They view photographs of the body on Abudallah’s cell phone.  The corpse is identified as a woman named Nesrim, a young widow whose husband has been dead for eight months.  We learn that her children were taken from her by her in-laws.  At the time of her execution, she was dressed in blue jeans and high heels.  The clothing subtly suggests that after becoming homeless, she may have been forced to resort to prostitution to survive.  The coroner explains that she was forced to the ground and shot at close range, reflecting “extreme hatred” on the part of her killers.

The second story thread follows the travails of Jasmin (pseudonym), who is shot while living at a safe house for women.  Moved to a shelter provided by the Kurdish Regional Government’s recently established Agency to Prevent Violence Against Women, she relates how she was previously shot three times while getting ready for evening prayer.  Despite the fact that a trio of alleged assailants has been taken into custody, Jasmin remains in danger.

Two articles in the Iraqi law, 130 and 131, had legitimized the killing of women in the name of honor.  However, the newer statute, 59, states that “killing a woman is killing a human being.” This does not deter honor killings from occurring; it only serves to make those committing the crimes “afraid of the law.”  Therefore, the assailants frequently hide the dead women’s bodies, pouring acid on them or throwing them off of mountaintops.

Bruni steps back and lets the assertions of various individuals represent the disparate points of view.  Runak Rauf notes that “people associate the word ‘honor’ with only one part of the body.”  Runak Faraj laments, “How cheap women’s blood is.”  The family members and in-laws of Jasmin weigh in with several thoughts. One states: “She must be killed.  If she reaches the women’s center we will lose our honor.”  Another gives an off-handed comment on the best form of interaction with a spouse: “Sometimes you slap or kick her, so she won’t repeat mistakes.”  It is opined that women are not killed “for no reason.”

Rania’s Police Chief Abdullah is clearly frustrated by the crimes and disturbed by the repetitive lack of resolution.  The Major of Rania is more circumspect.  He maintains that the number of honor killings is decreasing, a premise which Faraj emphatically rejects.  He suggests that “men are not responsible for women killing themselves” (a reference to the mounting numbers of girls and women who resort to suicide to escape untenable situations ranging from forced marriages to domestic abuse).  He calmly asserts, “We must do things step by step.  Everything will be achieved in it’s own time.”

Honor killings can emanate from motives as disparate as suspicion of adultery, speaking with a man who is not part of the family, or having an unknown number on a cell phone.  Bruni additionally touches on related issues.  These include the selling of young girls; “Zhin ba zhin”—the trading of one woman for another; “Trades for Blood”—when women are exchanged between families as a peace settlement after a feud.

On a superficial level, it is easy to disassociate these practices from western culture.  However, Bruni makes a point of tying the “uncivilized” custom of honor killing to violence against women worldwide and to domestic violence in the United States.

The equation is worthy of contemplation.

This article originally appeared on the website cultureID.

©2010 Justin Hackworth for BlogHer

The Hilton Hotel in New York City was packed on August 6^th and 7^th with 2400 attendees who had come for the 6^th Annual BlogHer Conference.  The last time I had been in the Grand Ballroom was to see Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama onstage, for a post-convention unity event.  Ironically, it was the divisive politics of the 2008 election that pushed greater numbers of women into the blogosphere, as they clamored to make their opinions heard.

That same year, the New York Times covered the San Francisco BlogHer conference with a story—on their fashion page—that had a tinge of snark.  Now, in 2010, no one doubts the influence or economic muscle of women online.  Anyone who remains unconvinced needed only to navigate the exhibition hall lined with 100 sponsors (a 50 percent increase over last year). Natural and green items, kids products, and an array of services all shared the floor.  From the smaller supporting sponsors like thredUp (a children’s clothing exchange) to the ranks of the top “Diamond” brands such as Pepsico and Procter and Gamble, the message was clear.  Women have clout to be reckoned with. As consumers—they are able to drive purchasing dollars.

When I asked a number of the corporate reps why they had chosen to be present at BlogHer, their answers all echoed the same mantra.  Amy Goodman, Fashion Trend Director at Timex said, “We’re working to make more connections in the blogosphere and to provide content opportunities.” Their booth was devoted to the company’s Fall line of watches.  Anne Westbrook, handling External Relations for Procter and Gamble, told me that P&G was back at BlogHer for its second year.  “We’re here because women bloggers are major influences.  We want to talk with them on their terms and bring them opportunities and relevant content.” In their large, house-styled booth was a full range of brands from CoverGirl to Bounty. I gravitated to the demonstration of their project, “Clean Water Blogivation.” The social media campaign was designed to “showcase the power of female bloggers to improve the lives of people in need of clean drinking water,” and to enable “women bloggers to be part of the clean water solution.”

PepsiCo chose the BlogHer conference to roll out their new women’s platform, “Women, the 5G Network.” A “Sofa Summit” breakfast early on Saturday featured top female brass from the PepsiCo team in dialogue with Campbell Brown. I contacted Jamie Stein, Director of Communications for Tropicana and the point person on PepsiCo’s online women’s initiatives, for a comment on their interest in the women’s blogging sector.  She replied via e-mail, “Women are, and have always been, incredibly influential on social issues, in business and at home with their friends and families. Now, with connectivity, women are wielding even greater power. As a company, we want to help enable the change women see, through innovative platforms like our 5G Network online channel and interactive experiences at events like BlogHer.”

On the lookout for socially conscious business tie-ins, I learned that Liberty Mutual was onsite to familiarize women with their mission, “The Responsibility Project—exploring what it means to do the right thing.”  Paul Alexander, the Senior VP of Communications, walked me through the company’s profile and its commitment to the “culture and values of integrity, dignity, and respect.”

Whether in the exhibition hall or over lunch, I saw a lot of action. Connections were being made. Women had come to learn, build their brands, and be energized.  Eyeballing the crowd, I saw moms with babies in strollers or on their backs (yes, there was a place to breastfeed) and a wide range of ages.  Elisa Camahort Page, BlogHer’s co-founder and COO, explained to me in an e-mail that one of the hallmarks of their events is diversity.  Regarding the speaker roster she wrote, “One third of our speakers were women of color, a slight improvement over last year.  We also ensure that we bring both liberal and conservative voices, LGBT voices, mom and non-mom voices to the microphone.”

The keynotes and panels delivered.  With forty-two sessions divided into seven verticals (change agents; passion; personal; professional; geek lab; writing lab; job lab), participants could be heard lamenting the difficulty of having to choose among topics.

“The FTC Guidelines: After a Year, Has Anything Changed,” had a room full of people trying to get a handle on the Endorsement Guidelines that were put in place to insure that “no deception in advertising” occurred on blogs. Top advice included being transparent, explaining connections to advertisers, and keeping disclosures in close proximity to the content.  One fundamental boiled down to, “When you get a product or cash, you must disclose; when you are not compensated, you don’t.”  Stacey Ferguson, Senior Attorney in the FTC’s Division of Advertising Practices, suggested the safest approach—“When in doubt, disclose.”

At “Creating Tangible Social Change: How to Move People to Action,” led by Women and Hollywood’s Melissa

©2010 Trevor Christensen for BlogHer

Silverstein, each panelist described how they were impacting specific communities.  Beth Terry, writing at Fake Plastic Fish, blogs about “living life with less plastic.” Terry discussed how her writing had helped to revise the plastic filter recycling policies of Britta in the United States.  Stephanie Himel-Nelson, the Director of New Media at Blue Star Families, outlined how the organization’s blog—dedicated to supporting and empowering military families—was becoming a go-to resource.  The biggest laugh lines went to Gina McCauley. The founder of two blogs, What About Our Daughters and Michelle Obama Watch, she is also the organizer of the Blogging While Brown conference, the first conference for bloggers of color.  Answering a question on how she handles personal attacks and negative feedback, McCauley responded, “I’ve built up a lot of scar tissue and taken a lot of body blows.”  On dealing with trolls she advised, “Don’t engage with people on platforms you don’t control.” She added, “She who pays the hosting fees makes the rules!”  All the speakers emphasized that an “authentic voice” was more potent than stats on page views or the number of Twitter followers.  McCauley pointed to one of her most valuable realizations from the blogging experience saying, “It brought out the reality that my ideas matter.”

Saturday’s morning keynote featured the International Activist Blogger Recipients. They were Esra’a Al Shafei, the founder of Mideast Youth; Dushiyanthini Pillai, the force behind Humanity Ashore; Marie Trigona, who publishes Latin American Activism; Freshta Basij-Rasikh, who contributes to the Afghan Women’s Writing Project. It was a dynamic and moving presentation. The focal points of their respective blogs included bringing together young people in the Mideast region, human rights, war and landmine victims, the 30,000 who disappeared in Argentina during the 70s and 80s, and developing a platform for Afghan women to tell their stories.  Underscoring the importance of global issues widened the perspective of the conference. It also made it impossible to ignore the risks being taken by these bloggers, a contrast to the secure setting of the BlogHer event.

Immediately afterwards, I attended “Radical Blogging Moms: Don’t Even Think of Not Taking These Moms Seriously.”  Joanne Bamberger (PunditMom) moderated.  Stephanie Roberts spoke about her photographic and digital documentary work.  Annie Urban discussed how her anger had pushed her to become politicized.  At her blog, PhDinParenting, Urban has been an outspoken critic of the Nestlē Corporation for “unethical business practices.”  Urban uses stories to explain a situation, rather than “prescribing or instructing.” She shared an interesting anecdote about how the legal firm employed by Nestlē had been scrutinizing her blog.

A number of women in attendance entered the blogosphere in response to family concerns, personal challenges, or the need to reach out and build a support system.  I met and spoke with Ellen Seidman, a magazine editor who writes “Love That Max—A blog about kids with special needs (and the parents who adore them).”  There was a panel on “Blogging Autism: Shattering Myths, Opening Eyes and Finding Your Tribe” and one entitled “Grief, Loss, Tragedy and Community on the Internet.”

The closing keynote was “How to Use Your Voice, Your Platform and Your Power.”  Alison Stewart helmed the dialogue with The White House Project founder and president Marie Wilson, author and activist Gloria Feldt, and journalist P. Simran Sethi. The participants parsed the question of power. Earlier, the audience had been reminded

©2010 Justin Hackworth for BlogHer

that in 2009, BlogHer placed #4 on Katie Couric’s list of the “seven most powerful people in media”.  The prevalent question was how to best leverage the power of women in the blogosphere—which was characterized as “the great equalizer.”  With the democratization of the media, Simran Sethi asked, “How do you want to use your voice?”  Wilson stressed the importance of women running for office and becoming part of government.  Feldt, who has a book coming out on “how women can change the way they think about power,” insisted that women have more of it than they realize.  She noted that corporate sponsors were “finally getting the picture,” but questioned if women understood the full import of what that entailed.  When I contacted her for additional thoughts on this concern she wrote me, “The two floors full of exhibitors aren’t here just because they love us. They’re here because they know the power of women’s collective purse.  So we need to use that power intentionally and collectively to shape the consumer market, to get what we want—whether it’s healthy snacks for our kids, green products, or shoes that are comfortable rather than hobbling us—and not allow ourselves to be bought.”

Before taking questions from those sitting at tables in the ballroom, Stewart asked each woman to speak about their own most difficult moments.  A roar of laughter greeted Wilson’s comment, “Behind every success is years of crap.”  Listening to women from the audience, it was clear that a sense of validation was achieved from their blogging contributions. One woman reveled in the realization that online, she was understood. “Wow,” she exclaimed, “You get me!”  Another participant thanked the speakers and the conference planners for “lighting candles in the darkness.”

Whether a woman was reaching out to build a community of mothers, dish on beauty and style, reflect a political agenda, or explore a lifestyle choice, it was clear that the BlogHer’10 demographic had a wide range of interests.

The general consensus was that once you were out there, pushback would be inevitable.  The response to that fact was the same…at every session across the board:  “Stand your ground and keep writing.”

On August 2, the 80 minute cinéma vérité production 12^th & Delaware has its debut.  Directed by Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady, the team responsible for the Academy Award nominated Jesus Camp, they once again employ a fly-on-the-wall point of view. This time they explore the white-hot struggle over abortion.

12^th & Delaware utilizes a street intersection in Fort Pierce, Florida, to illustrate the deep ideological divide between two camps of thought. The metaphor emanates from the physical proximity of two facilities located across the road from each other.  One is an abortion clinic called A Woman’s World.  The other is an office named the Pregnancy Care Center.  The later came into town in 1999, eight years after A Woman’s World opened up.  When a chiropractor vacated the adjacent building, the pro-life organization purchased it.  Part of the current strategy of those opposed to abortion is to have offices offering undefined services to pregnant women located close to Planned Parenthood health centers and independent abortion clinics. Many women inadvertently end up at the wrong destination.

The film took two years to make.  Footage was shot the same year that Dr. George Tiller was murdered. The team contacted over 100 crisis pregnancy centers before they chose the Fort Pierce location.  A screenwriter’s imagination could not have set the scene any better.

The film begins in the darkness before dawn.  At 5 a.m., a woman with a sign saying, “Thou Shalt Not Kill,” has already taken up her post directly in front of A Woman’s World.  She is a regular presence, with a repertoire of pleading entreaties.  One of her refrains is, “95 percent of women will tell you that they regret their abortion.”  She holds up a fetal figure, part of her visual arsenal.

We meet Anne, the director of the Pregnancy Care Center, who explains her commitment to her work.  With only “herself and her two dogs to be responsible for,” she is devoted to the pro-life movement.  We see her interact with a series of girls and women. The youngest is 15. The center’s offer of a free ultrasound is particularly persuasive, especially for those without insurance.

The camera follows Anne during her intake consultations, and then monitors her comments to her staff. “She’s abortion-minded,” or “Let’s look for a heartbeat to influence her decision,” are favorites. In a moment of chalking up victories for her cause she exclaims, “Yes. Yes. Two in one day!”  To a 17-year-old girl who has had a prior abortion, her advice is not to tell her mother about the situation.  When she takes the girl and her boyfriend through the visuals of the ultrasound (“It shows what’s happening there.”), she types onto the screen, “Hi Daddy.”

Anne is scathing in her attitude towards her adversaries across the way, equating the clinic to a car dealership.  However, as we watch her do a training session with future personnel, she puts forth an agenda of techniques that would put a car salesman to shame.  She tells them, “Attract the client.  Hook her right away. Engage her in conversation.”  She explains, “I’m not trying to talk her out of it.  I’m trying to get her in the door.  There’s no deceit in this.”

Direct and intense, Anne asks an 11^th grade girl, “Do you know what you really choose when you choose abortion?”  She shows her a video and informs her that as a result of the procedure, she may lose so much blood that she may die. Realizing she has overplayed her hand, she takes a step back and asks soothingly, “Want to go with the computer animated [video]?  There’s no blood.  It’s all animated.”

Anne does get push back from 24-year-old Victoria, who already has two children.  Trying to convince her to keep her options open, she buys her lunch while they talk things out.  When Victoria informs Anne that her boyfriend is verbally abusive, Anne offers that, “The baby might change him.”  However, Victoria stands firm insisting, “I have to do what’s best for me and my kids.  I know for a fact I won’t regret it.  Abortion is to terminate unwanted pregnancy.”  Stepping outside to make a phone call her conversation relates, “This bitch is getting on my (expletive) nerves.”  She’s not gonna be there.”  Resolving to get her ultrasound so she “can get out of there,” Victoria says later, “Maybe because she thought she bought me McDonald’s, I was gonna change my mind.”

A cast of players, like a Greek chorus, supports Anne’s point of view.  Father Tom Euteneur preaches in his church that abortion is a “ritualized blood sacrifice.”  He tells his parishioners, “We’re speaking about something deeply diabolical.”  A man in shorts, with the body of a bouncer, has made it his mission to track down the identities of the attending physicians—so that he can pass the information on to those who will make the best use of it.  He states flatly, “This is life and death we’re dealing with here.”  He notes derisively, “Someone came up with the idea it’s a woman’s right.”

Wandering into this tinderbox is a town resident who seems to agree in principle with the anti-abortion activists, but who strongly objects to their methodology—particularly their use of placards (picturing enlarged and dismembered fetuses) in a school zone.  “The Bible says not to judge,” she tells them.  “You keep pointing a finger.  This is not helping.”  After she walks away, the reaction is, “She’s an overprotective mom who doesn’t want her kids seeing posters of torn apart babies.”

It is forty-four minutes before the viewer meets Candace and Arnold, the wife and husband who run the abortion clinic.  The previous unrelenting rhetoric and ominous background music create a claustrophobic tension, giving an inkling of what the women seeking services are enduring.  Up until this point, our only exposure to Arnold is seeing him driving the doctor (whose identity is shielded by a white sheet over his head) to and from the clinic in his yellow Mustang.  Candace is pictured looking out from her orange-painted establishment through window blinds, monitoring the activity on the sidewalk.

The faces of the girls and women that Candace counsels are not shown.  A 46-year-old with health issues discusses her concern about being able to take care of a child at her age.  Candace asks her, “Do you have any doubts? I want to make sure this is what you need to do.”   She advises another woman—who confides, “I don’t have a good life” and appears beaten down by her partner’s sexual demands—that she cannot have sex without using condoms or birth control pills.

The young girl—in session with Anne before realizing that she was in the wrong place—tells Candace, “They made me watch this very gruesome video.”  Candace discovers that Anne has misinformed the girl about the timeline of her pregnancy. Believing that she is at seven weeks, two days, Candace gently tells her that she is actually at ten weeks.  After the girl leaves Candace says, “They lie to patients about how far along they are, because clinics go to ten to twelve weeks, and that’s it.”

Candace’s rhetorical questions to Anne and her organization are, “Why are you messing up these girl’s lives? Why are your playing around with them like that?”  As an afterthought she says dispiritedly, “I feel like crying today.”

Earlier, Anne is seen at the March for Life in Washington, D.C. At this juncture she announces to her opponents, “You can not outlast us.” Before the final credits roll, the audience learns that there are currently 4,000 pro-life centers in the United States, and 816 abortion clinics.

The filmmakers have offered up a valuable source of insights into the trench warfare on this topic. However, a resolution doesn’t seem to be in the offing any time soon.

This article originally appeared on the website cultureID.

In her new book, Spent: Memoirs of a Shopping Addict, author Avis Cardella chronicles the years she battled her compulsion to fill her emotional void with shopping forays that ranged from purchasing top of the line luxury items to second-rate knock-offs.

Raised in a blue-collar working family, Cardella was impacted as a young girl by her mother’s distinctive style of dress. She became entranced with fashion magazines in her formative teen years.

The underlying cause that Cardella points to early in her narrative, as the catalyst for the obsession that would slowly take over her life, was the trauma of her mother’s death.  In her opening sentence she wrote, “I used shopping to avoid myself.”

Cardella alternately describes her purchasing junkets as her escape, her boyfriend, her release, her therapy, and her drug. She came out of the fashion world—where she modeled briefly, was a photographer’s assistant, and then became a freelance writer. Throughout Spent, she lingers over descriptions of buttery suedes and designer creations cut from “dark blue lightweight gabardine wool.”  Some readers may not be able to connect with her New York City lifestyle.  However, they will certainly recognize her underlying desire to please others, her co-dependence on men, and her constant striving to replenish herself with another person’s love and approval.

In retrospect, Cardella realizes that she neglected to fully mourn her mother’s death. Instead, she immediately shifted the focus to her father’s needs, although her grief made her feel that “part of her was missing.”  She wrote, “I am empty, I can remember telling myself.”

Shopping to provide “respite form this void” started gradually.  As it grew, it became enmeshed with other dysfunctional behaviors.  Cardella’s romantic relationships, striving to meet the stringent expectations of the fashion crowd she was working with, and basic doubts about her self-worth were part of the mix. Constantly using language that references the need to “fill up an emotional hole,” Cardella related, “The thought of being alone sent me into a tailspin, almost a panic…Without shopping, I was afraid I would cease to exist.”

Many of the actions that Cardella describes in detail are classic symptoms of oniomania. To get a clinical point of view, I spoke with Sherry Gaba, LCSW, a psychotherapist who specializes in addiction and recovery. She gave me a list of symptoms that included:

• Spending unthinkable amounts of money on items you don’t need.
• Having a closet filled with purchases that still have the tags on them and have never been worn.
• Being financially in the hole.
• Having credit cards maxed out to their limit.
• Holding more than one job to pay for overwhelming bills.
• Being a former addict or alcoholic

Gaba’s elucidations dovetailed with Cardella’s account of her experience. Often, people have more than one addiction.  For Cardella, it was her need for love and her serial co-dependent liaisons.  Although Cardella’s acquisitions were store driven, Gaba spoke of those who have gone through the same out of control buying on the Internet.  Gaba made clear, that “Addiction comes in all forms,” and that there can be a motivation to fill “that empty void,” which supersedes and is “greater than any logic.”  Gaba noted, “When your life has become unmanageable and is out of control—that’s the mark of an addiction.”  However, many people refuse to seek help until they have reached the very bottom.

The first step is to admit that you have a problem.  Gaba suggested supportive choices such as:

• Getting rid of credit cards and paying for purchases in cash.
• Don’t shop alone—you have more of a chance to act out.
• Sit with uncomfortable feelings.  Learn how to self-regulate.
• Take one thing at a time.  Be present in the moment.
• Stay away from triggers (favorite stores, Internet sites, catalogs).
• Question whether you really need a purchase, or just want it.
• Consider joining a support group, as nothing can be more healing.

Gaba emphasized that getting well was “an inside job, not about having outside things.”

I contacted Cardella by e-mail with follow-up questions addressing the more concrete aspects of how she overcame her addiction.  She shared that her first proactive move was to put herself on “credit counseling.”  As she described it, “That stopped the ‘blood flow’ so to speak.”  She paid one monthly bill for all her credit cards–which was adapted to her budget.  With that financial anxiety ameliorated, it “freed [her] up to concentrate on the more important aspects of [her] recovery.”

Although Cardella was not in therapy, she recognized that her issues stemmed from psychological roots, with the core emanating from the unresolved grief surrounding her mother’s death.  She acknowledged that her “romantic relationships” had served as a way to “avoid confronting difficult emotions.”  Her biggest challenge, which she accepted, was that she “needed to face being alone to really move forward.”

Paying attention to her physical self and the mind-body connection was also “critical” to her recovery.  Eating properly, walking daily, yoga, and meditation all had a stabilizing effect for her.  Her long walks were particularly effective in staving off her urge to shop when she wanted to keep her feeling of sadness, loneliness, and fear at bay.  She revealed, “I would be walking in Central Park with tears streaming down my face.  I was forcing myself to face things I hadn’t wanted to think about for years.”

So much in Cardella’s story reflects the difficulties girls are confronted with as they traverse the passage to young womanhood.  How they are influenced by societal demands was illustrated in a story Cardella related about when she was 14 years old and “forfeited running track…in favor of sitting out high school gym class wearing my fancy clothes.”  In hindsight she understands that rather than “exploring her physical prowess,” she chose to “concentrate on her appearance.”

Perhaps the strongest presence in Spent, other than Cardella’s, is that of her mother. Graduating from fixating on her mother’s clothing and jewelry, Cardella moves instead to embracing the insights, words, and advice that will become her mother’s true legacy.  Cardella wrote in her e-mail, “It fascinates me that I had chosen to remember only my mother’s appearance at the same time that I chose to only concentrate on my own appearance.  It was as if I needed to dismiss my mother’s essence in order to keep dismissing my own essence.  It was only when I was ready to face myself that I started to face my mother’s words—who she was—rather than simply what she looked like.” When she began to read her mother’s notebooks, Cardella felt guided by her mother’s basic wisdom.

At the end of Spent, Cardella recounts the story of how she emptied her closets as she readied for a move to a new apartment, outside of New York City.  During this process, she came face to face with innumerable articles of clothing—and their respective histories (not to mention all the unopened bags.)  It was an example of wardrobe as “autobiography.”

Like Dorothy’s realization in The Wizard of Oz, Cardella connects to the simple truth that her recovery process “was about being more conscious and mindful in her life.”  In rethinking herself she asked, “Why did I feel I was not enough just as I was? What would happen if I couldn’t shop? Who and what was really important in my life?  I knew I wasn’t made of the clothing that was in my closet, but what was I really made of?  I had been shopping for an identity for all those years!”

Unfortunately, lacking estimable self-worth is all too common for women.  In Spent, Cardella takes us on her journey of self-discovery…and lets us see that it is never too late to come out on the other side.

This article originally appeared on the women’s health site Empowher.

"Musicans" by Marc Chagall. Lithograph. 1963

Pavel Vinnitsky is a man on a mission.  His goal is to revive the Klemzer tradition, seek out composers to write original music based on Jewish themes, and combine the presentation of this music with a standard classical repertoire.  As the artistic director of the Jewish Arts Ensemble of New York, he is well on his way.

The journey began in the Ukraine, just hours from the capital of Kiev, where Vinnitsky was born and lived until he was sixteen.  Here he began his classical music training—while simultaneously being exposed to his town’s Klezmer musicians.

Before the Soviet Union fell, and until the time that the sizeable Jewish community emigrated in the 1990s, Jewish culture and music were suppressed.  Klezmer was played underground and at weddings only.  Equally immersed in both the Klezmer and classical idioms, Vinnitsky felt as if he were “living two different musical lives.”

When Vinnitsky’s family put down roots in Israel, they moved to the north of the country near Haifa.  After serving in the Israeli Artillery Forces, Vinnitsky attended the music academy at the University of Tel Aviv, where he received a Bachelor’s Degree in clarinet performance.  He was accepted into a Klezmer trio, adding the sounds of his clarinet to those of a violin and an accordion.  The group toured Europe, made recordings, and performed in festivals.  For a period of five years he was doing full time gigs, giving as many as one hundred concerts in a year.  “That,” he told me, “is where I got my Klezmer training.”  The trio both improvised and worked out fixed arrangements.  By 2003, Klezmer melodies were constantly reverberating in his head.  He was only doing a small number of classical recitals.

Yet when he met his future wife, Anna, a pianist who focused on scores from the late Renaissance to Chopin, he realized that he wanted to reconnect with his classical past.  Together, they formed a chamber duo and came to America. Vinnitsky attended the Yale School of Music, where he studied with David Shifrin. He moved into a full-time, freelance career as a guest performer for New York City chamber music ensembles, the American Symphony, the American Ballet Theatre Orchestra, and the Metropolitan Opera Orchestra.

The concept of the Jewish Arts Ensemble of New York evolved as an answer to Vinnitsky’s search for a way to combine the two sides of his musical personality.  He began developing a musical catalogue based on Jewish thematic sounds and folklore. When he realized that there was a dearth of material, it became his passion to fill in that gap. Vinnitsky began to seek out composers.

Music composed solely by Jews is not the criterion. Rather, it is the utilization of source material and themes that have a specific harmonic language. Vinnitsky is looking to build a sound that emanates from Jewish liturgical chants and regional folk music. He explained to me, “Jews didn’t have a land, so we were influenced by the neighboring people we were listening to.”  Vinnitsky has the model established by the Hungarian composers Zoltán Kodály and Béla Bartók—who merged the strains of national folk melodies into their contemporary scores.

Klezmer has its roots in the songs, dances, and instrumental compositions that were played at the rituals of Eastern European Jews. “Klezmer is a valuable treasure not just to Jews, but to the whole world,” Vinnitsky emphasized.  He added, “The music I’m interested in is not just Klezmer.  It can be Sephardic, cantorial music, even theatrical—like Ha-Dybbuk.”  The latter has been performed in various iterations, including a 1937 Yiddish film.

As part of the “Arts at the Park” series in Manhattan, Vinnitsky’s Jewish Arts Ensemble offered a program that encompassed Mozart, Rossini, and Klezmer. Featured was an original composition for the violin, cello, and piano, entitled T’filah. Composed by Peter Alexander, it was commissioned by congregation Da’at Elohim.

A brief history lesson by Vinnitsky paints a picture of 20^th century St. Petersberg as a center where Jewish folkloric music was collected and documented.  It was acknowledged that the most authentic part of the Jewish musical tradition was the music of the synagogue, which dates back to the Second Temple in Jerusalem. From these two foundations, composers wanted to develop new music.  However, national politics, the rise of Communism, anti-Semitism, and later Stalinism, got in the way. As a result, the goals of the New Jewish School of music were thwarted.

Vinnitsky is moving forward, supported by his group of instrumentalists which includes Ragga Petursdottir on violin, Junah Chung on viola, and Anna Vinnitsky on piano. His endeavor is to build on “beautiful source music” through instituting what he defined as a “living lab” for composers. He hopes to “reestablish the Jewish National Movement in music” to create a “distinct national Jewish sound.”

When I saw Vinnitsky performing the Klezmer pieces, he threw his body into the music, bending at the knees and lifting up on his toes. I thought of Benny Goodman, who also actively straddled the world of popular and classical music.  In 1939, Goodman’s band had the number one song in America, And the Angels Sing.  It was a rerecording of trumpet player Ziggy Elman’s 1938 instrumental number, Freilach in Swing.  Elman had first gained recognition as a trombonist with Jewish bands in Atlantic City and Philadelphia.

Goodman and Elman would appreciate Vinnitsky’s efforts. When the music video hits 1:51 in, you will know what I mean.

On the pavement at the northeast corner of 54^th Street, a man dressed in combat fatigues was sitting behind a black plastic crate.  He was wearing dog tags, and on his shirt—at the right hand side of his chest—were three pins.  One designated sergeant’s status; another was a Marine Corps insignia. The third was the Stars and Stripes.  He had placed a backpack on top of the rectangular structure, along with an upside down military issue cap that held a few dollar bills and some loose change. Right next to it was what appeared to be a driver’s license.

It wasn’t.  When I looked at it more closely, I saw it was his Veterans Identification card.

He had none of the usual messages printed on a piece of cardboard, explaining his situation or requesting help.  There was just a simple tableau that people were bypassing at a mile a minute.  No one broke their stride.  There were no second glances. Nobody showed interest as to why he was on the street.

The former soldier came across as a rock amid a rushing stream.  He was anchored to his spot.  People flowed past him, but he was not acknowledged.  As I observed the scene, I turned to my teenage son and said, “I have to talk to him.”

I went over and said, “Hi, are you a vet?”  “Yes,” he replied.  “I served in Afghanistan.”  Reacting to the fact that I was interested in talking he offered, “The VA is holding up my benefits.  I went to see my Congressional representative up on 125^th Street to get some help.  When the VA found out, they told me that if I complained again my benefits would be ‘a long time coming.’ ”  Tears started to fill his eyes.  “My brother is over in Afghanistan now,” he added, his voice breaking.

I struggled between wanting to learn more and respecting his space.

“You should get in touch with IAVA—the veteran’s group,” I suggested.  “They have an office here in the city.  Have you ever seen their ad for returning vets?” I asked him.  He looked at me directly and said, “I haven’t seen television in over a year.”

I wrote down the information for him on a scrap of paper he had, using one of the pens he took from a neat row stitched into his backpack.  I fished my wallet out of my purse and opened it up, and put some money in his hat.  As my son and I started to walk away he called after us, “Have a happy Fourth of July.”

It was an unsettling experience.  As we rode home on the bus, I wondered how many others like him were struggling to survive—while waiting to get what was due to them from their country.

When I got home, I contacted the IAVA offices.  I knew they were front and center in the fight to help veterans readjust to civilian life.  Part of that included how to navigate the claims system.  Chrissy Stevens, Communications Director, told me by e-mail, “We have heard a lot of similar stories from our membership and that’s why we are pushing so hard on this issue on Capitol Hill. Vets in New York and across the country are waiting for far too long for benefits.”

Part of the IAVA 2010 Legislative Agenda is devoted to recommendations on how to modernize claims processing.  According to IAVA, the current method is antiquated—which accounts for “frequent errors, countless bureaucratic red tape, and a lengthy wait for benefits.”  In fact, the VA backlog is approaching one million cases.

While Americans are enjoying picnics, sales, and fireworks, too many of those who have served in our all-volunteer military are fighting a system that is supposed to help them.

I can only speculate on how many other men and women have fallen through the cracks…and where they will be on Independence Day.

Quilt in honor of Andrea

Most American women might presume that the dangers of maternal mortality are a concern and problem only in developing nations. They’re wrong.  A March 2010 report put out by Amnesty International entitled, Deadly Delivery: The Maternal Health Care Crisis in the USA, highlights eye-opening findings. The data is based on research carried out during 2008 and 2009.  The organization has framed their conclusions as a call to action for women’s human rights in America.  The revelation that “more than two women die everyday in the USA from complications of pregnancy and childbirth,” with half of those death being preventable if appropriate maternal health care was accessible, demands accountability.  Since there are no federal requirements to report maternal mortality, the actual number of deaths may exceed those counted by double the amount.

What constitutes maternal health?  The World Health Organization defines it as the “health of a woman during pregnancy, childbirth, and the post-partum period.”  How does America, the number one global spender on health care, measure up against other nations? The latest available statistics come from 2006, when there were 13.3 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.  In an example of a one-on-one matchup, when compared with Germany, the United States racks up figures at four times the German numbers.

Within our borders, the news is even more dismal.  Broken down by state, Maine had the best showing at 1.2 deaths per 100,000 live births.  The District of Columbia had the most disconcerting figures: 34.9 per 100,000 live births.  What, as a country, are we doing wrong?

As documented in the 138-page hard copy Amnesty International report, there is no shortage of contributing factors.

First and foremost, America has no nationally implemented guidelines and standards for a comprehensive system of maternal health care.  Amnesty has suggested that the “U.S. Congress should direct and fund the Department of Health and Human Services to establish an Office of Maternal Health.”  Projections show that improving the standard of care could prevent close to 50 percent of deaths.

A starting point is the necessity of prenatal care, which is defined by The Healthy People 2010 Goals as thirteen prenatal visits beginning at the first trimester.  Those women who do not receive this medical attention are shown to be three to four times more likely to die of pregnancy-related complications than women who do.  The reasons women don’t connect with this crucial care emanates from a health system that currently sustains impediments to care, and is rife with bureaucracy, inadequate services, and even discrimination.

In 2009, more than one in six Americans had no health insurance.  Thirteen million women from the ages of 15-44 were part of that demographic.  Health care costs can be prohibitive.  An uncovered ultrasound costs $1,000.  Accessibility in both rural areas and inner cities is a major obstacle.  In these settings, it can be problematic for women to obtain transportation to clinics, and even then, many of the serving institutions are seriously understaffed.  Quandaries arise when a woman has to choose between showing up for her job and keeping a prenatal visit.  Inflexible office hours, lack of childcare for other children, and language barriers also present challenges.

Women of color (African-American, Latina, Native American), women in poverty, and immigrant women are hardest hit by these obstacles to prenatal care. It was documented that African-American women were four times more likely to die of pregnancy related complications than white women.

Jennifer Dohrn, DNP, has worked on the frontlines as a midwife since 1987, when she joined forces with the Morris Heights Health Center in the southwest Bronx in New York City. As the first freestanding birth center in the country for urban women, the MHHC served those with no access to health care.  Dohrn wrote by e-mail, “Maternal mortality is not an unsolvable problem.  We have the technology to provide safe motherhood for women in the United States and globally.” When Dohrn started, one-third of the women in the community had received no prenatal care at the time of delivery, and infant mortality ranked amongst the highest in the country. Opening a center that was accessible to women encouraged early entry into prenatal care given by skilled midwives, continuous involvement of the family, and safe delivery with promotion of breastfeeding.  There were no long waits, the staff reflected the culture of the clientele, and state financed programs for pregnancy covered the costs.  As Dohrn made clear, “This is a model of how it can be done.”

Another key factor in the maternal health equation is the Caesarean section.  Almost one-third of all American deliveries fall into this category, a number that is twice as high as the World Health Organization recommendation.  The odds of death after a C-section are more than three times higher than vaginal births.  75 percent of maternal deaths occur after a Caesarean delivery.

I spoke with Dr. Charles S. Mahan about the alarming extent of procedures taking place nationally.  His primary concern was that women were having unnecessary operations.  He has seen an escalation in the procedure over the past five to tens years.  Dr. Mahan believes that a major reason in the rise of C-sections is that women are not getting enough facts about potential complications to give “true informed consent.”   He stressed that many patients were under the impression that it was safe to deliver their babies at thirty-seven or thirty-eight weeks.  The optimum time frame is between thirty-nine to forty-two weeks.  Dr. Mahan suggested that doctors might be choosing this form of delivery based on considerations that were not purely medical.  He emphasized the inherent dangers, explaining that “the surgical procedure poses short and long term health risks to mothers and infants.”  Dr. Mahan pointed out that a “scarred uterus poses risk to future pregnancies and deliveries.”  In addition, women who have Caesarean deliveries are more likely to experience “deep venous clots that can result in pulmonary embolism or stroke.”  He referenced the CIMS website and their February 2010 fact sheet for cutting-edge data on Caesarean sections.  It should be noted that inadequate post-partum care contributes to more than half of all maternal deaths, which occur between one and forty-two days after delivery.

One of the points that the report highlighted was that “women are not given a say in decisions and do not get enough information about sign of complications and risks of interventions—including induced labor and Caesarean deliveries.”  Severe complications that almost cause a maternal death during a delivery are euphemistically referred to as “a near miss.”  Annually, 34,000 American women have that experience.

Angela Burgin Logan falls into this category.  When I spoke with her by telephone she related a hair-raising story that combined elements of medical arrogance, missed and ignored symptoms, and a form of physician brow-beating that made her feel dismissed as an “hysterical” mother-to-be.  Her mantra now is “Listen to your own voice.”

A college educated, upper-income African American woman living in western New York State, she took extreme care in researching and picking her OB-GYN.  Yet as she described, “Not too long into the pregnancy, something didn’t feel right.”  She was gaining weight at a troubling rate, and at five months she could not lie flat on her back.  She had pains in her left arm.  The red flags were up for orthopnea and heart failure.

Only at her urging did her doctor finally agree to send her for a work up.  The nurse/technician on duty alerted her to worrisome symptoms.  Despite the presence of protein in her urine—a clear indicator of preeclampsia—her doctor “sluffed it off.”

Burgin Logan spent her final three months of pregnancy sleeping upright in a chair.  When she rushed to the hospital ER at thirty-seven weeks complaining that she “couldn’t breathe,” her husband was advised that she was having a panic attack.  Rather, fluid had flooded her lungs, making it impossible for her to take in air.  An ongoing series of medical missteps meant that Burgin Logan had to be induced into a coma in order for her life to be saved.  Miraculously, she and her daughter survived the birth process.

Having been given only a 20 percent shot of survival, Burgin Logan told me, “I’m on a mission to make a difference for mothers and babies.”  She writes about her experience on her site, and blogs about related issues for Lifetime Moms.

In retrospect, Burgin Logan believes that the issue of “gender” and “not being taken seriously” played the largest role in her ordeal.  If this is the experience of a privately insured, professional woman— one can only imagine the tribulations facing those women who lack financial resources and easy availability to health services.

This article originally appeared on the women’s health site Empowher.

Image courtesy of  ©2010 The Safe Motherhood Quilt Project

Quilt block is in honor of Andrea Campanari.

One out of every three women will be touched by violence during her lifetime.  In the age range spanning 15-44, women are affected in greater numbers than they are by illness and traffic accidents.  Annually, more than 4.5 million violent crimes against women occur worldwide. In the United States, those who are the victims of domestic assaults lose 8 million days of paid work per year.

Violence against women diminishes the economic development of nations. Currently, 70% of the “global poor” is comprised of women.  Building security for women creates a foundation of building blocks that yields strong civil societies—both in developing nations and those countries that are struggling to recover from the ravages of conflict and war.

It has been shown that investing in women and creating opportunities for them to generate income produces positive results.  Globally, the default rate on loans to women is extremely low.  Women spend their earned funds judiciously on food, fuel, education, and health.  Their resulting activities are community driven, and they advancer peer-led models of engagement.  If a woman gets involved in creating income, she brings her friends—who have witnessed her success—into the process.  It generates a ripple effect, and women become stakeholders in the economy.

There has been analysis showing that women in emerging countries have been crowded into low paying sectors such as serving, food, and beauty, as well as artisan projects.  Regarding the latter, this is often the result of an intervention that takes place late in the game, when skills have not been previously put into place.  The question remains, “How do you scale up from weaving baskets?”  One of the new systems being implemented is the channeling of money into communities through loans for education and healthcare.

In order for women to be active in the workforce, they must be protected by laws and have access to health care and education. Governments need to understand how women are held back by cultural strictures.  One example is the issue of women and land rights.  While constituting the largest sector of agricultural workers, women make up less than 1 percent of landowners. Whether her husband loses the land she has been working on through default, or she is passed over because she does not qualify for inheritance rights—a woman separated from the land she has cultivated is left without a source of income and no safety net.

Change must take place at two levels.  First, it must be put into play by governments, their legal systems, and the global adaptation of the International Violence Against Women Act.  Second, NGOs need to implement transformation through a grassroots, on the ground approach.

In a session devoted to the “intersection of socio-economic status and violence against women and girls,” it was pointed out that access to education for girls is an essential component to the economic piece—as well as a “mitigating factor.”  Wendy Baldwin, of Population Council, spoke about how “education is transformative for girls.”  Building on girls’s assets between ages 12-14 offsets a “negative life trajectory, including protection from violence.”  Baldwin explained, “If you are not in school at age 13, you are likely to be at risk for child marriage at a time you should be developing a vision for your life.”  Lynne Paterson, co-found and director of Pro Mujer, agreed that “starting younger is better.”  Her organization is working with the mothers of the next generation “to make the women change agents in their own lives.”

In the United States, the picture is not dissimilar for girls of color and those from low-income homes who do not get access to health care, education, and skills training.  They, as well, lack the requisite footing they need to move forward in life.

When a woman earns her own income, it makes it possible for her to kick out an alcoholic husband.  However, a rupture in the dynamics of a household partnership, particularly where the man is unemployed, has shown a spike in domestic violence incidents.

In order for women to reach higher paying jobs, there has to be gender parity. In the area of job creation and developing fields, such as the green sector, a place at the table has to be set for women.

Women’s financial empowerment is a key to national stability and growth.  Using only half of a country’s potential human resources is inefficient and wasteful. Additionally, reports from around the world show that violent behavior against women creates an enormous fiscal burden.

Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney told the audience that economists believe that 30 percent of a nation’s legislature must be women in order to reach a critical mass. At that point, change can be effected.

In tackling these problems, women can no longer be half the population, yet only qualify as a “special interest group.” They need to have power over the money they earn and must slip the bonds of being a “side issue.”  Another elemental step would be to get women into leadership positions—globally.  As Zainab Salbi, founder of Women for Women International pointed out in an anecdote, it’s hard to give advice to developing nations on equality…when the Western diplomatic force has less than 50 percent women.

This article originally appeared on the website WomenMakeNews.

Photo Credit:  Courtesy of David Zamdmer © 2010

With a mixture of rage and passion that probably seemed out of whack to the full-time teachers watching me, I called him down from his seat of glory and read him the riot act.  As he skulked away, I explained in no uncertain terms to the still-shaking girl that she could go anywhere and do anything she pleased.  Then I thought to myself, It’s the 21^st century and nothing has changed.

That story, and other remembrances, came to mind while I was reading the engaging anthology Click: When We Knew We Were Feminists.  Editors Courtney E. Martin and J. Courtney Sullivan have fashioned a book that speaks to how much women who care about feminism have in common.  With an ongoing intergenerational dialogue between women who self-identify as feminists, that at times is tinged with a undertone of anger and resentment, these voices remind the reader of a fundamental commonality.  The high profile schisms that accompanied the Obama vs. Hillary primary race; older women questioning where younger women stand on their support of abortion rights…These divisions become neutralized and I can envision Rodney King asking, “Can we all get along?”

Reading Click will help one generation to understand and appreciate what experiences have informed another group of women—through personal histories other than their own.  The contributors range in age from 18 to 41.  As someone who is in the middle of a wave, the stories resonated for me reigniting my anger, evoking compassion, and reminding me of the days when I wondered if I were alone in thinking that something outside of me—in the culture–was wrong.

When I read Miriam Zoila Pérez’s contribution, which painted a picture of her political arguments with her “conservative” father, it made me vividly recall an afternoon when I argued with my parents about Marilyn French’s best seller, The Women’s Room. The intensity of my emotions from that conversation came back to me with absolute clarity.

What makes Click such a great read is that all of the offerings bring something different to the party.  Elisa Albert had me laughing out loud with her deconstruction of the Jewish holiday Purim in her piece, “I’m Gonna Wash That King Right Out of My Hair.”  Each of the twenty-nine essays has unique insights and observations to share.

Karen Pittelman discusses her realization that “when we bury our stories, we bury one of our greatest political strengths.”  She writes, “What I love about feminism is the idea that telling the truth about our lives is a radical, transformative act.”

In the opening sentence to her essay, Marni Grossman states, “Sometimes it feels as though feminism was my consolation prize for surviving an eating disorder.”  She points to the tyranny of the societal message “that our value is in our sex appeal,” and imparts that “putting down the laxative and picking up Naomi Wolf was the most political act I have ever committed.”

As she evolves from questioning if the work of her war correspondent boyfriend is of greater relevance and “more serious in the eyes of the world,” Alissa Quart comes to terms with her relationship, which eventually grows into a marriage.  Simultaneously, she achieves awareness that her contributions—and the female writers that she emulates—could be “as searing, in their way, as investigating bullets, presidents, and dictators.”

Deborah Siegel shares how Anita Hill’s “ordeal” was the vehicle that “framed a younger generation’s understanding of women, politics, and power.”  More specifically, it was Siegel’s “inauguration to feminist activism” and her eye-opening recognition of the anti-feminist backlash it unleashed.

Raised by parents, aunts, and grandparents who built a foundation for her being “nurtured into feminism,” Marta L. Sanchez tells how a rape at age sixteen “instantly made me a feminist.”  Her belief system was shattered the day that a 22-year-old acquaintance offered her “a ride to church” during Christmas week.

A feminism that “fit” was the moment everything crystallized for Mathangi Subramanian, who authored “The Brown Girl’s Guide to Labels.”  In her second semester of graduate school, Subramanian discovered the work of Chandra Mohanty, “a third world feminist” who deconstructs how “western feminists fought for the right to work, while third world feminists acknowledged that women did most of the world’s work, and were…fighting for the right to rest.”

Janet Tsai examines the stereotype of being a “nerdy, smart Asian kid” who questions the authenticity of her admission to a “highly selective, innovative, start-up engineers college.”  Why is the prevailing notion that if the college has achieved a fifty-fifty gender parity, that the women can’t possibly be as smart as the men? Tsai ultimately confronts “gender differences in the sciences,” and gains understanding on why it triggered doubts about her talents and abilities.

Many of the essays are laced with individual responses to the impact and examples of mothers, and the behaviors that they modeled.  In that respect, the reactions reflect how each generation is influenced and shaped by the preceding one.

Ultimately, this volume—that pays homage to the Jane O’Reilly 1971 Ms. magazine story, “The Housewife’s Moment of Truth,”—will offer a new source of anecdotal enlightenment to a continuum of women.  How fortuitous it will be if it sparks an acknowledgment of the inherent connection between everyone’s struggles.

Hopefully, Click will fall into the hands of girls growing into womanhood, including the one from the playground who was informed, all too early, of her alleged limitations.

Andrew Rasiej, Founder and Executive Producer and Micah L. Sifry, Editor and Curator, led the first day of conversations and panels through the high points and rough spots – with equal amounts or humor and taste.  Rasiej, the epitome of good manners, did his best to smooth over the tech issues that beleaguered the Skype talks. For the one featuring Newt Gingrich, he gently admonished the largely progressive crowd, reminding them that PDF was an event that reached out to all constituencies.

Gingrich’s segment had been part of a series of short talks on the topic, “Can The Internet Fix Politics.”  The other eleven speakers included Eli Pariser, Executive Director of MoveOn.org, Anil Dash, Jane Hamsher, and Scott Heiferman, CEO of Meet Up.  In one of the most retweeted comments of the morning session, Heiferman proposed, “Use the Internet to get off the Internet!”  His suggestion to deal directly with people was applauded, despite the furious blackberry scrolling in the midst of the proceedings.

Daniel Ellsberg, of the Pentagon Papers fame, and Julian Assange, Founder of WikiLeaks, compared notes on “Whistleblowing, Then and Now.”  I attended two press conferences.  At the first,  The Sunlight Foundation rolled out TransparencyData.com, which lets “anyone keep track of campaign donations, lobbying, and contracts at the federal and state level.”  The foundation has consistently worked to facilitate how the public receives information about the government through sites like ReadTheBill.org and FedSpending.org. New Media Ventures gave a thirty-minute talk on the launch of their “National Network of Progressive Angel Investors,” which will focus on creating progressive political change.

The structure of the afternoon presented attendees with the dilemma of choosing only one out of eight potential sessions.  Some people could be seen leap-frogging around, but as I was live blogging via Twitter, I followed the panels from start to finish.  “Truth, Factchecking, and Online Media” was a robust dialogue that included speaker presentations.  Jay Rosen began his with a reflection upon the legacy of Sen. Joseph McCarthy.

An integral part of a PDF get together is the exchange of innovative ideas with the people who are driving them.  I had several engaging conversations.

Simon Dermer, the Managing Director of Essential Accessibility, told me about how his company was providing “software-based service that makes online environments fully accessible to individuals with physical disabilities.”  Susan Dzieduszycka-Suinat, the President and CEO of Overseas Vote Foundation, was in from Munich.  Born in the United States, she has created tools and services that help overseas and military voters participate in federal elections.

There were innumerable nuggets of insight and sound bites throughout the day.  Below are some of my favorites:

Hashtags are the bumper stickers of the 21^st Century

More data was created in 2009 than since the beginning of time.

Clay Johnson:    ”There’s more to an online strategy than an online campaign.” “Let’s solve problems with technology and stop counting our list.”

Deanna Zandt:    “Tools are trees in the forest.”

Jane Hamsher:    ”We are pouring concrete into our problems.”

Scott Heiferman: “A movement is when people self-identify. Have your  followers connect with each other and watch leaders emerge.”

John Perry Barlow: “The Internet is the greatest thing since the advent of fire.”

Cheryl Contee:      25% of people on Twitter are African-Americans.

Looking forward to Day 2.  The theme is “Rethinking…”  Follow the “real-time” conversation on Twitter stream with #PDF10.  I’ll be on the ground @mgyerman.