Scarleteen.com already offers a lot to its users: extensive articles galore, diverse resources, and countless chances to get personalized help. In fact, if you were to compare Scarleteen to something culinary, it could be a virtual Smörgåsbord of sorts, an all-you-can-eat buffet with the availability of a 24-hour convenience store.

You might divide the many courses that Scarleteen serves up as follows: The articles are the main course, the meat– or tofu– and potatoes whereas the message board. offers second– and third and fourth– helpings. Sexpert Advice is a dessert bar, and links to outside resources are a bit like recipes to try out later. The Scarleteen blog is hors d’overues, offering appetizing snacks of what’s to come and finger food to go. As for the creators and cooks, Scarleteen Director and Designer Heather Corinna is the head chef, and volunteers are both waiters, delivering the information to your table, as well as cooks adding their unique mixtures to the brew.

You already have the final product at Scarleteen, the articles and advice that make up the collective pièce de résistance delivered piping hot to your seat. Now here’s a chance to look behind-the-scenes to see what’s being cooked up, and get to know its creators– right here at the Scarleteen blog. So, without further ado, we would like to announce to you: Spotlight on Scarleteen!

Spotlight on Scarleteen will be a new blog feature that helps users get to know the site and people behind it better, recognizing the committed volunteers and introducing you to new and lesser-known content. Here are some things you can look for:

• You see regularly article updates on the main page, but did you know that many more articles are frequently added? Spotlight on Scarleteen will help bring some of those to your attention.
• If you’re a regular at the message boards, you probably have a few favorite forums– perhaps you even regularly add or start new ones. We will be highlighting popular and up-and-coming threads as well as their contributors– you just might see your name mentioned here!
• You probably know many ST volunteers by their names and their helpful advice and feedback. They’re a diverse bunch and active not only on the boards but beyond as well. Here’s a chance to get to know them better and even ask questions of your own. .

You will see contributions by and/or interviews with the following people and more: Abbie is an equine major who comes from the home state of Ben and Jerry. Alice is inspirational young mom who hails from the Pacific Northwest; Courtenay is based in British Columbia and hopes to make her love for dogs into a career as a Vet Tech. Joey is a grad student who currently calls Germany her home but never leaves her Buffy collection behind during all those moves; Lauren recently traded sunny southern California for the Nordic terrain of Finland. Maggie is an awesome, all-around helper, and you will also be hearing more from orca, who will be generously lending a hand. Last but not least, Véro spends her time offline reading books, doing Aikido, and studying social sciences in Canada.

Our first message board feature will spotlight users sounding off on Sexual Milestones and our first article highlight will be on Going the Distance on how to make long-distance relationships work. If you would like to recommend any articles or message boards threads for us to highlight here, we would appreciate it. If you have any specific questions for volunteers, we’d love to hear those, too. Thanks for reading, and we look forward to sharing more with you soon!

Often, Scarleteen content is quoted within other blogs and articles, and my favorite thing about that is seeing how what we've done here can further other conversations and ideas; how others take some of what we've done in a different direction or to a further point.

Here are a few recent blogs and articles who have quoted or used some of our content to help address an array of topics. To check out the whole of the pieces, just give the links a click.

Interracial Dating: Does It Really Aid In The Race Reconciliation Process? (at UrbanMinistry.org)

When one finds true love, one may believe that the love they have for the other person is capable of moving mountains. Because of this belief, they want to shout their love at the top of their lungs; they may even desire to demonstrate it through public affection [i.e.--hand holding, kissing and cuddling, etc.] Because this love is so huge, there may even be a chance of the both of you successfully challenging societal norms, including norms inherent within the system of racism.

However, what if an interracial relationship potentially reflects the values inherent in the system of racism? Further, though the arrangement can be interpreted as love, what if that love is built upon the systematic belief that one race is better than another? In instances where this is the case, interracial dating cannot necessarily be viewed as a catalyst for change; rather, it can be viewed as a reflection of the oppressive nature of racism—a system that often forces us to look at beauty within a race-dominated paradigm that creates an even bigger disparity not only within minority communities, but in majority based communities as well.

Hypersexualized society puts young girls at risk (at Straight.com, Vancouver)

Pussycat Dolls creator Robin Antin is the worst thing to happen to teenage girls in a long time. For proof, look no further than The Search for the Next Doll, the reality-TV show she hosted last year. One of the episode's themes was confidence, and one of the best ways for the young women to acquire some, in Antin's view, was to strip to their skivvies and "dance" in glass cages. Nothing like preparing the youth of today for tomorrow.

The truly hurl-inducing scene of Antin, purveyor of all things slutty, teaching girls that gyrating in lingerie equals self-assuredness shows up in Sexy Inc. Our Children Under Influence, a documentary by Montreal filmmaker Sophie Bissonnette.

The film, coproduced by the National Film Board and the YWCA Montreal, includes everything from video clips of Nelly Furtado ("Promiscuous Girl") and Britney Spears ("I'm a Slave 4 U") to comments by psychologists and teachers about the impact of our sexed-up culture on youth. In essence, the film conveys how young girls want to be popular, and to be popular they have to be hot. They've been taught that their main value comes from their looks, not their brains, talents, achievements, goals, or aspirations.

No wonder, then, that fishnet stocking-clad Bratz dolls are coveted and thongs and spaghetti straps are cool.

Sexy Inc. served as a jumping-off point for discussion about our hypersexualized society at a Week Without Violence seminar presented by the YWCA Vancouver in October.

"The film shows the enormous pressure we see for very young girls to be sexy too soon," said Janet Austin, chief executive officer of the YWCA Vancouver, noting that one in two women in their lifetime will be subject to physical or sexual abuse.

Jan Sippel, the abuse-prevention coordinator for the Vancouver school board, spoke at the session of ways to counter the ubiquitous commercialization of sex and the objectification of women. One is media literacy.

The Future of Sex Ed (at Melissa Gira Grant)

Let’s talk about the 90’s, seriously? There was this notion that everyone online was just there posing as some sexual projection, like it was all the same three guys in raincoats with pink panties underneath. That nobody would want to be themselves, or want real information from real people. The Internet was understood as a fantasy playground, totally disconnected from one’s “real” self. This is when it was especially trendy to talk about virtual sex, teledildonics, and a lot of other nonsense that never came to pass or catch on.

Scarleteen was one ray of light in the 1990’s. Here’s what it looked like in 2000, and here’s the message boards today, over ten years after it began. Scarleteen proved that a sex educator could come up from her own community — in Heather Corinna, its’ founder. That a community could build trust, even when anonymous. Heather’s told me that some of those same users are still around today. It’s the model much of online sex ed followed, and rightly so.

2001. America does really get online. Maybe it was 9/11. Internet social scientists love to argue this point out. We still don’t know what it is, but all of a sudden, what were our personal blogs — and here’s my really embarrassing personal blog from 2001 to 2003 on Livejournal — were read by a much larger audience.

We started to see the impact our personal words had. That we didn’t have to segment ourselves to be read: that we could mix up sex, politics, health information, and random intimate day-to-day details, and be meaningful in a very different way to our readers. We gained their trust by seeming real in a very impersonal media landscape.

Sex and the Steel City: Understanding a common sexual phenomenon: vasocongestion (at The Silhouette)

“Oh baby, don’t stop now, you’re killing me”

Sound familiar? Whether or not you have ever been in a situation where your partner or yourself does not achieve orgasm during sexual activity, you have probably heard of the term “blue balls.” This is a slang term that Discovery Health defined as “the testicular aching which may occur when the blood that fills the vessels in a male’s genital area during sexual arousal is not dissipated by orgasm.”

The slang term probably came from the bluish tinge the testicles take on during the phenomenon, but the real word for it is vasocongestion. It is due to the depletion of oxygen within the blood when it pools for a long period of time within the prostate region. Vasocongestion occurs when a male becomes sexually excited; the arteries carrying the blood to the genitals enlarge and the blood vessels constrict. Discovery Health reported that this uneven blood flow causes more blood to become trapped in the penis and testicles causing an erection and increasing the size of the testicles, in some cases, up to 50 per cent. If an orgasm is reached and ejaculation occurs, the arteries return to normal size and the penis and testicles follow suit in a short time. However, if an orgasm does not occur, Discovery Canada reports that a feeling of “heaviness, aching and discomfort” may occur.

While this is an actual occurrence that males experience, it is only a relatively mild and temporary discomfort. Vasocongestion is used as a rather convenient and persuasive excuse for why an orgasm is necessary. The important thing to remember, however, is that while this is an actual phenomenon, it is not painful and certainly not permanently damaging to male genitals.

Females can experience vasocongestion as well, however it is usually referred to as pelvic congestion.

I also want to link you to a recent book salon at Firedoglake for Jessica Fields' new book, Risky Lessons: Sex Education and Social Inequality I guest hosted. I really enjoyed the book and thought it brought up a lot of issues with sex education we often address here, but so infrequently see addressed elsewhere. The interactive salon was bustling and full of a lot of excellent conversation with Jessica I think you'll find of interest.

Since its dawn in America around 100 years ago, sex education has been and remains a controversial and provocative topic with often greatly polarized opinions about and approaches to it. In the last 12 years, since the advent of federally-funded abstinence-only sex education, the battles over sex ed by parents, advocacy, religious and health organizations and the government have amplified. Yet, caught in the middle are the students and teachers whose everyday experiences of sex education are seldom as clear-cut as either side of the debate suggests. With teen STI, pregnancy and birth rates in the U.S. still the highest of any developed nation, and with teens living in a world of increasingly mixed sexual messages, these issues are crucial.

Yet, whether we're talking about abstinence-only or comprehensive sex education, the issue doesn't stop at who is getting what kind of sex education. As someone who works to fill in sex education gaps for teens, no matter what type of sex ed they have or have not had, I can attest to the importance of looking not just at the battles around sex education and assuring young people get the information they need, but of issues in and around sex education which are often overlooked or diminished.

Any type of sex ed, particularly when administered through the schools, still exists in the macrocosms and microcosms of both the social and school environment and the greater context of the world we, and teens, live in. While most sex ed focuses on risk management, sexuality is far larger than something as simple as either having sex or not, or either suffering or avoiding negative health consequences. Issues of social inequities, the precarious balance of power within sexual and other interpersonal relationships and the politics of pleasure all play a part -- even when left unaddressed by curricula -- in what any kind of sex ed teaches, in how it is taught and learned and in what a student walks away from sex education with… and without.

Our guest for today's discussion is Jessica Fields, author of "Risky Lessons: Sex Education and Social Inequality." Risky Lessons brings readers inside three North Carolina middle schools to show how students and teachers support and subvert the official curriculum through their questions, choices, viewpoints, and reactions. The book highlights how sex education’s formal and informal lessons reflect and reinforce gender, race, and class inequalities.

Ultimately critical of both conservative and liberal approaches, Fields argues for curricula that promote social and sexual justice. Sex education’s aim need not be limited to reducing the risks of adolescent pregnancies, disease, and sexual activity. Rather, its lessons should help young people to recognize and contend with sexual desires, power, and inequalities.

By now we all know that Obama is the president-elect, but what about all those other issues that were up for decision? Heather put together a guide to the ballot measures particularly relevant to Scarleteen and our mission and I thought I'd post the results.

ARIZONA
Proposition 102: Approved
Arizona now defines marriage only as the union of one man and one woman.

ARKANSAS
Proposed Initiative Act 1: Approved
It is now illegal for unmarried couples, of any gender, to adopt or foster children.

CALIFORNIA
Proposition 4: Defeated
Teens retained the right to obtain an abortion without parental notification.
Proposition 8: Approved
Voters decided that marriage in California should be limited to heterosexual couples.

COLORADO
Amendment 46: Too close to call
At this time it is unclear whether the Colorado government will be continuing affirmative action or not. I will update this as the final votes are tallied.
Amendment 48: Defeated
With only 27% of the vote this measure calling for personhood to begin at fertilization was resoundingly defeated.
Amendment 51: Defeated
Colorado voters chose not to increase the state sales tax. The increase would have funded assistance for people living with developmental disabilities.

CONNECTICUT
HJ 21: Approved
Seventeen year old voters who will be eighteen by the time of the general election may now vote in its primary election.

FLORIDA
Amendment 2: Approved
Florida added a constitutional amendment to its two existing statutes banning gay marriage.
Amendment 8: Defeated
Voters chose not to supplement community college funding.

MICHIGAN
Proposal 08-2: Approved
Michigan loosened its restrictions on stem-cell research.

MONTANA
I-155: Approved
Montana will expand health coverage for uninsured children.

NEBRASKA
Initiative 424: Approved
Affirmative action will no longer be a factor in the practices of the Nebraska government.

OREGON
Measure 58: Defeated
Oregon will retain its current, more flexible programs to serve ESL students.

SOUTH CAROLINA
Amendment 1: Approved
The age of consent in South Carolina is now 16 for both men and women.

SOUTH DAKOTA
Initiated Measure 11: Defeated
Abortion remains legal in South Dakota.

Are there any ballot measures you found particularly relevant that didn't make this list? Any thoughts on the results? Talk it over on the message board.

I am writing this Scarleteen blog entry after having read Heather's piece after I returned home from my local polling place. Heather, I thank you for sharing your thoughts and reasons for voting the way you did this year; this blog entry was inspired in large part by your post. I find myself holding many similar sentiments to the ones you expressed here so well. As a fellow Green Party supporter as well as long-term Ralph Nader fan, whom I admire for standing by his convictions and staying true to his word in his actions*, I found myself with not just one but two very appealing third party/independent candidates that I'd very much like to vote for this year.

However, I decided that keeping McCain out of office, imagining just how horrible his presidency would be for the US and world at large, was most important: I cast my vote for Obama. As Heather so succinctly stated, "While I’d love to vote for my party (wouldn’t I always!), this is another of those years where I don’t feel able to do that." I will share that this decision was almost down to the wire: a convincing phone call from my highly-regarded and well-informed younger sister yesterday, as well as my attendance of an inspirational Henry Rollins spoken-word show this Fall helped give me that final push.

I respect McCain's experience as a POW but am incredulous and appalled that he, after enduring the horrors of torture firsthand, does not truly support veterans and their families. Palin is given a lot of flack in ways that most male politicians are not, her intelligence questioned and family decisions so intensely scrutinized. Honestly, the clothing she wears or what she does in her free time does not bother me, but her politics are so extreme that I find them almost hard to believe. The fact that her town charges rape victims for their rape kits is enough for her to lose any and all support political from me.

I believe Obama will win by a landslide, including gaining the majority in places previously labeled as more conservative. (Then again, the idea that someone might not vote for a candidate just because he's black is such a foreign concept to me...) I hope and believe that the current US is much more progressive than people often think. When it comes down to it, it’s not really about one particularly charismatic young politician inspiring Americans to be “The Change We Need.” Instead, it is Americans being finally so fed up with all the crap that has occurred these past eight years in their name that they will exercise their right– and responsibility– to react accordingly. We will see!

*On my sentiments for Ralph Nader: I wish more liberal people weren't so negative about his decision to continually stand up for his strong believes rather than blame him for costing the Democratic Party the 2000 election. To me, this is another version of “blaming the victim”. Yes, the Florida recount was a mess and unfair. However, as for “stealing the election,” I believe those critical Democrats should recognize that their party was not meeting people’s political needs and worked harder to garner up their support. Indeed, I know that McCain and Palin like to use the word Maverick a lot but I believe this title is best suited to Nader.

I know it's a bit late in the game for those with early voting, but I just wanted to write a letter about voting this year. I do this every election for my friends and family, though I often write it more for those in the concentric circles around the people I know than for those closest to me. I often see or represent some groups plenty of people don't have a familiarity with or a real awareness of.

Perhaps obviously, I'd also encourage you to pen a letter like this of your own, but you're also more than welcome to circulate mine.

What I don't usually do is publish this letter or who I am voting for, but I am making an exception this year.

For those not in the know, I'm a longtime Green Party person. And I have loved that this year, my parties presidential ticket is two amazing women of color, two peacemakers, two big thinkers, two women who -- in my book -- really get it and who could be amazing leaders.

While I'd love to vote for my party (wouldn't I always!), this is another of those years where I don't feel able to do that, because there is simply no room for what ultimately is a symbolic vote. This country isn't ready for a two-woman ticket yet, let alone a third party or the Green party. I don't like the two-party system, but at the same time, I don't feel like this week is the right time for me to fight that battle. However, I have to say that this year, I don't feel very let down about voting outside my party. In fact, even if my party had a chance this time around, I'd probably still vote outside of it.

I want to take a few minutes of your time and tell you not about me, but about some of the women I meet at the clinic I work at, who come into my office for counsel and tell me some of the most intimate details of their lives. As you already know, I provide education to millions of young people every year (with no public funding, by the by, due to providing accurate information, a drought which will continue in another Republican administration), and counsel anywhere from ten to fifty people one-on-one daily at Scarleteen. But I don't sit down with them in person the way I do with the women at the clinic: I don't see their faces, they don't ask me for a hug or to hold their hand, or cry where I can see them when I simply acknowledge the challenges they face as real and not at all unimportant.

I want to tell how you much they are like me, you, other women and people you know. I want to tell you how important they are, even though they are clearly so easy for some to ignore or dismiss, even though they are so often rendered invisible.

Many of them already have more children than they can support or care for. Many are of color and/or low-income, and often become pregnant not because they have planned pregnancies with cooperative partners, but because their access to contraception has become more and more limited thanks in part to the Bush administration over the last eight years. Many also have sexually transmitted infections as well as being unwantedly pregnant, both too frequently due to an ignorance purposefully cultivated by the Bush administration through the billions of dollars sunk into knowingly inaccurate abstinence-only education, some of those funds even moved from family planning programs which not only provide accurate information, but also provide things like contraception, sexual healthcare and maternal healthcare for women who WANT to be or remain pregnant.

Some are in my office because they have been raped, a crime which still is diminished by so many of our leaders (and Palin did indeed allow Wasilla to charge rape victims, sometimes as much as over $1,000, for the rape kits done on them by the justice system: we see a lot of clients at our clinic from Alaska), and where also many women find themselves denied emergency contraception to prevent pregnancies due to Bush administrative support of healthcare providers refusing to supply effective and wanted contraception to women based on their own "moral" judgments. Bush may well leave a legacy of an HHS policy to be decided on this week which now would allow doctors and healthcare workers in public healthcare, even in healthcare clinics specifically for family planning, to refuse all contraception to patients based on their own personal feelings about the "immorality" of family planning.

Many have such a hard time taking care of the children they already have because they still are not paid at the same rates as men (despite often having the greater burden of expenses, particularly single mothers) Many, like myself, live without healthcare or in grossly inadequate public health programs, if they can even qualify for those. Many have children who are having to also go without healthcare (bear in mind that our child mortality and health rate is one of the worst of all developed nations); many have children who most certainly have been a child left behind when it comes to education. Some of them do not even want to terminate their pregnancies: they would want to have more children, but the reality of their lives -- they are often already parents, they know what parenting requires -- does not allow for that choice, nor does the continued lack of support for mothers and children in this country, a hard irony coming from those who say they want to prevent abortion. Some grew up in foster care, and know too well the truth of how many adoptive families there really are out there, especially when we're talking about children of color: they don't want to risk birthing a child who will end up in the foster care system.

Given we have a big base here in Washington, some are in the military (where abortion has been banned and contraceptive access grossly limited in recent times, a ban McCain/Palin supports, and this in spite of the fact that the rate of sexual assault for women in the military is exponentially higher than it is for civilian women), some have partners in the military. Many of the women with partners in the military take care of two many children without help or assistance, and suffer from neglect or domestic violence due to partners who come home suffering from PTSD, gross fatigue, injuries and other issues and ailments our VA has been doing little about. (This is a particular issue for women in the military, who are having a doubly-tough time getting veterans care and assistance.) Many of these military families have had losses over the years due to the war in Iraq, and many of them still in service there want to just come home.

John McCain and Sarah Palin not only both seek to axe Roe vs. Wade, they both have records and statements of nonsupport for the many things we know prevent abortion in the first place: sound family planning programs, accurate sex education, domestic violence prevention, and an awareness of the many women whose lives do not even remotely resemble their own. John McCain and Sarah Palin have every intention of continuing harmful abstinence-education policies as well as continuing to underfund or reduce sound family planning. McCain was also one of the rare senators who has voted against anti-domestic terrorism measures (the FACE act) for clients and workers at family planning and abortion clinics: the law and protections which help keep our clients -- including those coming in just for a pap smear or birth control, or for pregnancy testsw when they want to REMAIN pregnant -- my co-workers and myself from being bombed or shot in the head on any given day.

The McCain healthcare plan is lunacy, seeming reasonable only to those with the wealth to actually HAVE $5,000 a year to spend on healthcare. McCain also has opposed many things which would improve the status of mothers, children and families in the states, such as the Family and Medical Leave Act. McCain voted to take $75 million from the Maternal and Child Health Block to fund abstinence-only programs, and voted to terminate Title X, our national family planning program which serves those most in need of birth control and reproductive health services.

John McCain and Sarah Palin are against the Lily Ledbetter act, a bill which would allow women more time to discover their pay isn't fair and to seek restitution. They paint it as a "lawyer's dream," cavalierly -- perhaps because neither of them are in personal need of it -- but it's a woman's dream: it certainly was Lily Ledbetter's dream when she discovered after a good deal of time -- as is often the case -- how unfairly she was being treated. Nearly all of the veterans organizations are in support of Obama and Biden. Despite being a veteran himself, John McCain has not had a record of being particularly helpful for or supportive of other veterans.

Neither John McCain nor Sarah Palin are feminist: neither ever have, nor intend to, provide real support or help for all women nor to strive for gender equality. from what I can tell, John McCain was not looking to empower women with his choice of Palin: he was looking to empower himself with eye-candy and someone the religious right would like better than they like him. McCain has voted continually to cut or underfund the Violence Against Women Act which Biden has been the champion of and the Victim Economic Security and Safety Act which Obama passed.

John McCain and Sarah Palin are no friends of general public education (or the arts), which empowers those most marginalized in this nation, both intellectually and emotionally: the women and children most at-risk of some of the worst circumstances are more often the most uneducated or undereducated. Suffice it to say, John McCain and Sarah Palin are also no friend of anyone who is gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender.

Barack Obama and Joe Biden not only fit all of these bills, they fit most fantastically.

These are issues they not only have a realistic awareness of, but a deep desire to remedy. These are issues they actually talk about, and make actual plans for, rather than barely give lip service to in order to court favor or votes, when even that is given at all. These are issues they view through the lens of fairness and equity, not through the lens of what they want for themselves or via their personal religious doctrines.

If these issues seem less important than taxes, the war in Iraq or international diplomacy, I'd posit you reconsider. All in all, no matter who wins, someone is likely to have to pay higher taxes. All in all, no matter who wins, given the systems of support per the very structure of our government, we're probably going to do just fine when it comes to diplomacy (though I'd say Obama will likely do a better job there, given how many foreign nations have voiced a far deeper respect for him than McCain). All in all, no matter who wins, working our way out of the mess Bush has made in Iraq is going to be difficult at best.

But the kinds of issues I'm talking about aren't minor or secondary. Civil rights, human rights, issues are foundational for our nation and for the quality of life of everyone here. They are the very reason this nation was founded, and why the men and women who entered into the wild experiment that was democracy here took the grave risks they did to do so. They knew -- as so many of us know -- that life is only so valuable without a certain quality of life. They didn't find these kinds of issues to be trivial, neither do I...and neither should any of us.

These kinds of issues are where we can really see the biggest differences between the candidates, and they are profound differences which deeply impact the quality of life of so many citizens. These are the kinds of issues where we can get a good look at who a candidate really cares about, and if they truly have in mind the interests of all of us, or merely some. These are the issues where we can see if a candidate intends to unite all of us or create or enable deeper divisions. These are, in my mind, the kinds of issues where we can see who is ready to lead (and where to) and who is not.

I won't lie, I want things to be better for me, personally.

I want healthcare for the first time in over 20 years: I need it badly. I want the young people I counsel to come to me able to spell, and the young women I see at Scarleteen to not doubt their equality as they still so often do. I want those of us who aren't heterosexual to have the same rights as those who are. I want to be able to continue to obtain contraception since I continue to know I cannot afford a child -- financially or per our joint health. I do not want to have to counsel women choosing abortion solely or primarily because they have not been afforded the same rights and benefits as other women when it comes to contraception, maternal healthcare, pay, protection from abuse or assault and other equities anymore. I want to be able to get the same funding for the accurate, needed health information I supply to millions a year that organizations who don't even serve a fraction of that number of, and who supply purposefully and knowingly inaccurate information to (and part of my job is often correcting, or managing crises which have arisen from that misinformation), do. I want the arts supported. I want equal pay for equal work.

I want this country to stop calling one-sided xenophobic assaults "wars" or "liberation." I want for America to stop being the country every other country validly despises and is ashamed of. I want for the 20 years I have spent in activism about education, women's rights, young people's rights and sexual and reproductive health to really mean something, and for a chance to do the work I do without constantly feeling I am fighting a battle I cannot make strides in, let alone win.

But -- and perhaps even more so -- I want these things and more for the women I meet at the clinic.

The beauty is that taking care of their needs doesn't stand in the way of taking care of my needs, your needs or anyone else's needs.

That's the beauty of real fairness, real equity, real investment in the aims laid down in the Constitution and the heart of this nation. That's the beauty of being civic-minded, and doing your best to think, when you vote, not just of yourself but for all of us as a nation.

I don't expect Barack Obama or anyone else to be able to fix all of this in a mere four years. But what I do expect, and am absolutely certain I will see, is for Barack Obama to try. I do expect both some actual remedies and also real groundwork laid in order to make the fixes which are more long-term possible, as well as a foundation and a spirit which may well just influence how people think so that people like the invisible women I see become more visible. I have not been even remotely hopeful that that is something I would finally start seeing for years: it is an amazing thing to feel it possible in the near future today.

That's a whole lot of why I'm not only voting outside my party and for Barack Obama, but why I feel exceptionally good about it. And it's why I'd ask you to consider doing the same.

If you're still on the fence, do some research today. Be sure to look through the nonpartisan voting guide at Scarleteen here: http://www.scarleteen.com/article/politics/the_2008_scarleteen_u_s_presi...

But whatever you do, by all means, please vote. And when you do, do your very best to do so with the real aims of this nation -- and with your hopes, not your fears -- at heart.

~ Heather Corinna, Scarleteen Founder

Election day is almost here, three days and counting down. The few days before an election are typically the worst in terms of mudslinging because the campaigns know that people aren't going to have as much time to fact check prior to voting. Often the campaigns will attempt to make the most passionate arguments against the other candidate, and those arguments may contain a lot of fallacies, but the campaigners realize that no one has time to look up information and find out the truth. This is why we should all be very wary of the untruths that may be presented to us and think critically about what we are hearing.

One rumor I've been hearing lately is about how Obama is a terrorist, or that he has links to terrorist organizations. Now, let's take a moment to consider this statement. Barack Obama is a United States Senator. He's in a high position of power in the U.S. Government. One would assume that someone who is high up in the government has probably had a lot of background checks to make sure they are not connected to any known or suspect terrorist organizations. And you can be sure that if such background checks did reveal a connection, that person would not be allowed to keep their office and even aspire to a higher office (indeed, the highest office in the country), but would most likely be sitting in a federal prison, perhaps even in Guantanamo Bay. If, for some bizarre reason, a person with connections to terrorist organizations did rise up to power in the U.S. Government, what exactly would that say about our government?

Looking at this statement carefully, we can easily see how absurd it is, yet these rumors are still spoken. Some of the things you may hear in the next couple of days may not be so obvious in their falseness, so we must be vigilant and try to think carefully and clearly about what we see or hear, whether it's on TV or from your best friend or your history teacher.

One website many of you may find helpful is FactCheck.org, "a nonpartisan, nonprofit "consumer advocate" for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics" (from their website's "About Us" feature). Right on their front page is a listing of recent postings on political ads about McCain and Obama. They also allow you to email questions concerning the different candidates, and they have an archive of frequently asked questions.

So be vigilant, don't believe everything you see or hear, and, most importantly, remember to vote on November 4th. For those of you still uncertain about what each candidate stands for, or if you just need a little refresher, check out our D-luxe 2008 U.S. Presidental Election Voting Guide.

For the third time in four years, Californians are once again to vote on an abortion referendum. Proposition 4, or The Child and Teen Safety and Stop Predators Act: Sarah’s Law, will require physicians to notify a parent, legal guardian or some other adult family member of a minor seeking an abortion and then wait 48 hours before performing the procedure. This ballot initiative was rejected the first two times it was voted on, and it needs to be rejected again.

But why, ask proponents of Proposition 4, aren’t we hailing this as a step forward in fostering parental involvement in their young daughters’ lives? Any teenager who comes from a loving family would instinctively turn to her parents in such a life-changing event as a pregnancy.

Such openness between children and parents is something to be strongly encouraged, but to mandate by law such communication will benefit no one.

For those lucky enough to have strong family relationships, a law mandating adult notification to obtain an abortion is utterly superfluous. And then, what of the minors who cannot turn to their parents? What of those who come from dysfunctional and abusive families? And what of the girls who are impregnated by their fathers?

There are provisions for courts to waive the notification requirement if it’s demonstrated that the abortion is in the minor’s best interests. The problem is that when a girl is in the position of being pregnant and not feeling like she can turn to her parents, the last thing she needs is to go through additional hurdles to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, especially through a judge who decides for her.

Furthermore, when minors who fail to notify their parents are forbidden from having an abortion, they are necessarily forced into childbirth. Rather than asking if abortion is in a minor’s best interests, we might well ask how childbirth is in a minor’s best interest. Abortion is not something to be taken lightly, but supporters of Proposition 4 seem to have forgotten that neither is childbirth, which involves nine months of pregnancy with its inherent risks, and culminates in parenthood or in giving up the very child that spent so long gestating in the womb. Both of these decisions are difficult enough for a grown woman, but for a girl of 16, they are without a doubt every bit as heavy decisions as abortion, if not more so.

Let’s not kid ourselves. Sarah’s Law is not about strengthening parent-child relationships or about protecting child welfare. It is not about giving teenagers guidance through a difficult decision. It is instead about undermining abortion as an option for a subset of the populace; it is about finding a new angle from which to attack the rights granted by Roe v. Wade.

Consulting one’s parents about life decisions is a sensible thing to do and as such, one to be encouraged. Indeed, I still turn to mine for support and guidance. This should not translate, however, into legal mandates, especially not ones that undermine the right to control one’s own fertility. Therefore, citizens of California, I urge you to vote no on Proposition 4.

A lot of times we think about abuse, whether it's physical or emotional, as something that goes on behind closed doors, and it's hard to change that frame of mind when, in reality, nobody sees the vast majority of abuse that occurs. Like many of the ST Staff, I've seen my share of abuse as the victim, not the witness. So it seems somewhat surprising that I was so shocked to see it, in full daylight, on a busy downtown street this past weekend.

As the student of a "suitcase" college with a non-existent nightlife, I very rarely get a chance to go out with friends in the evenings, just because there just ISN'T anywhere to go. However, I decided to go up to a nearby city (the only city in Vermont, really) about an hour away for the weekend. As far as cities go where I live, Burlington is about as big as it gets. The Marketplace is pretty amazing, and it's right on the Waterfront of Lake Champlain. There's plenty of cafes and restaurants, shopping, street performers, etc. You can spend all evening there and not see the whole thing. I, however, saw a little more than I bargained for Saturday afternoon.

I was walking with a long-time girlfriend down the main connecting street, which was a pedestrian only walkway. We sat down at a small french-styled cafe for something warm to drink (with buildings on either side, the street acts as a wind tunnel, and it can get pretty darn cold.) We chose a two person table by the window, and hadn't been there for more than 5 minutes when we saw a young woman, who couldn't have been much older than us, ran by the window, stumbled, and fell.

Immediately we both stood up (as did everyone else in the restaurant) and moved toward the door to see if she was alright. She got to her feet and continued to run, dodging stunned onlookers and street lamps. My friend turned to me and said "she probably got in trouble with the cops." I was about to turn to go back to our table when a man, dressed in leather jacket and khakis, also came screaming by the shop. I stepped out of the cafe and watched as he caught the woman by the hem of her jacket, threw her to the ground, and started kicking at her stomach and back.

Needless to say, I was shocked. Abuse happens, far too often, but hardly ever in the public eye. That's part of what makes it so hard to get prosecuted in serious cases: unless there is physical evidence, it's almost impossible to prove, as it pits the victim against the abuser. Plenty of people probably kept walking, figuring it was an angry pimp chasing down a wayward prostitute (and yes, Vermont has prostitutes. Almost everywhere in the U.S. still does.) Those people wouldn't have seen what followed.

I'm tempted to say that the person who witness the abuse feels almost as helpless as the victim themselves; your better judgment leans toward self-preservation, but the human side of you wants to help. As someone who's experienced it, I couldn't help but try and act. I started running toward the woman, who was around 40-50 yards from me. Another man was already trying to drag the man away as he continued to throw kicks and punches at the girl on the ground, spitting on her and calling her a "cheating bitch", and as I got about 15 yards away a middle-aged man grabbed my arm and pointed to two police officers pulling up in a patrol car just across the way. I stopped and watched as the first office ran in and tried to subdue the attacker, while the second pulled his collar radio to his mouth and got the woman up and out of the way. Her coat had been ripped off, she was bleeding from her head, her eye was swollen, and I was close enough to see the bruises on her arms and neck. I watched the gentleman and police officer struggle with the man as he continued to scream and yell obscene words at the girl, calling her a "bitch" and a "whore", repeating the phrase "I should have f****** killed you when I had the chance". They finally got him cuffed and on his stomach, and the other officer waited for EMS to arrive to take care of the woman.

I wish I had made all this up. I have never wished so badly that things like this don't happen, but the reality is unkind and often denied: people are abused every day, every month, every year. It's just rare that it's shoved in our faces as it was mine. Needless to say, I've never heard the streets so quiet. I listened to a woman whisper to a man next to her, "Wonder what she did to deserve that?" and all I could feel was the anger growing inside me. I left without saying a word.

Abuse is never the victim's fault. There is never a good excuse to hit, slap, or even speak unkindly to someone, much less let one's anger turn into the full-fledged attack I and dozens of others witnessed. This is the other problem with the public and abuse: the first instinct isn't to feel sorry and sympathize with the victim. The first instinct is to ask "why?".

I could make this post a rant about the ignorance of people, and how frustrating it is for myself and those who have experienced it first hand to explain to others the pain we feel in trying to move on from it, knowing full well that they can never understand. But that isn't my purpose here.

My purpose in telling this story is to show, plain and simple, that abuse happens. It happens everywhere, every minute of every day. And most of the time, the people who are being abused don't have anyone to tell. They continue to be abused, with no one to turn to.

I read the headline online in the paper Sunday afternoon: apparently, the girl was the man's long-time girlfriend. Reports from medical experts and eyewitnesses stated he had been abusing her for some time, both physically and verbally/emotionally: she had suffered multiple concussions, had had broken bones, and far more than the average person's share of cuts and bruises. After years of suffering, she had finally had enough, and was planning on leaving him. He caught her having lunch with a male co-worker, with whom she wasn't involved, became enraged, and chased her down the street, and I witnessed the rest.

If doctors and witnesses can testify to all this, and it can make the front page of a newspaper in a day, why, why, WHY didn't someone call the cops? Call her parents? Call someone? The woman I saw on the street is 26 years old, just a few years older than myself. Why wasn't someone watching out for her?

It's the sad truth that all too often, no one notices or thinks too much until it's too late. The woman will recover physically: she's being kept at the hospital for further medical treatment. But emotionally, it may take years before she can truly continue her life as it was before this happened. She may never recover at all. And what's absolutely infuriating is that it could have been stopped a long time ago.

You don't have to be helpless as a bystander to abuse. If you ever see someone being physically hurt, or being emotionally/verbally abused by someone they know, it is your DUTY to tell someone. Tell a friend, a teacher, a mentor, a counselor, a police officer, or a parent. Talk to the victim, and encourage them to report the person, or at least distance themselves from them. Abuse victims are often too frightened to admit they are being abused, or if they aren't, are convinced that it will stop, or that somehow they deserve it. No one every deserves to be abused. No one.

Don't be a bystander to abuse. You can do something, even if it's as simple as speaking out. Just that small act could save someone's life.

If you're a U.S. resident, at this point, you've probably given some thought to who you will be voting for for President, and may even know who you'll vote for by now. You may also know, or have some idea, of who you will be voting for when it comes to positions in your state up for the vote this year.

What you might not be prepared for in advance are ballot measures which will be printed on your ballot November 4th, which are just as important, and not always explained clearly or detailed. These measures are one of many reasons why your vote matters so much.

This year, some states have measures up for the vote which may be of particular interest to Scarleteen readers, such as parental notification laws for minors who want an abortion, age of consent laws, same-sex marriage, civil rights, stem cell research, education issues, even a proposal to lower the voting age for primaries in one state (whoohoo!) and another to ban abortion outright (grrrr). Here are a few of them to help you find out what's what in advance.

ARIZONA: Proposition 4 Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy. This measure amends the State Constitution to require, with certain exceptions, a physician (or his or her representative) to notify the parent or legal guardian of a pregnant minor at least 48 hours before performing an abortion involving that minor.

Proposition 102 Marriage. Proposition 102 would amend the Arizona Constitution to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.

ARKANSAS: Proposed Initiative Act 1. A proposed act providing that a minor may not be adopted or placed in a foster home if the individual seeking to adopt or to serve as a foster parent is cohabiting with a sexual partner outside of a marriage which is valid under the constitution and laws of this state; stating that the foregoing prohibition applies equally to cohabiting opposite-sex and same-sex individuals.

CALIFORNIA: Proposition 4 Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy. This measure amends the State Constitution to require, with certain exceptions, a physician (or his or her representative) to notify the parent or legal guardian of a pregnant minor at least 48 hours before performing an abortion involving that minor. (This measure does not require a physician or a minor to obtain the consent of a parent or guardian.) This measure applies only to cases involving an "unemancipated" minor. The measure identifies an unemancipated minor as being a female under the age of 18 who has not entered into a valid marriage, is not on active duty in the armed services of the United States, and has not been declared free from her parents’ or guardians' custody and control under state law.

Proposition 8 Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. This measure amends the California Constitution to specify that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. As a result, notwithstanding the California Supreme Court ruling of May 2008, marriage would be limited to individuals of the opposite sex, and individuals of the same sex would not have the right to marry in California.

COLORADO: Amendment 46 Discrimination and Preferential Treatment by Governments. Proposes amending the Colorado Constitution to:
- prohibit Colorado government from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, or public contracting;
- make exceptions for federal programs, existing court orders or other legally binding agreements, and bona fide qualifications based on sex; and
- provide the same remedies that are available for violations of existing Colorado anti-discrimination law.

Amendment 48 Definition of Person. Would amend the Colorado Constitution to:
- define the term "person" to "include any human being from the moment of fertilization"; and
- apply this definition of person to the sections of the Colorado Constitution that protect the natural and essential rights of persons, allow open access to courts for every person, and ensure that no person has his or her life, liberty, or property taken away without due process of law.

Amendment 51 State Sales Tax Increase for Services for People with Developmental Disabilities. This would increase the state sales tax to help provide for more help and assistance for those people who have developmental disabilities.

CONNECTICUT: HJ 21 Voting Age. This resolution proposes a constitutional amendment allowing 17-year-old citizens who will turn 18 on or before the day of a regular election to vote in its primary. Under the resolution, such an individual must apply and otherwise qualify for admission as an elector. He or she may then vote in the primary held to determine nominees for the regular election. Upon turning 18, the individual's electoral rights attach. By law, a "regular election" means any municipal or state election. State elections include candidates for federal office.

FLORIDA: Amendment 2 Florida Marriage Protection Amendment. This amendment "protects" marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.

Amendment 8 Local Option Community College Funding. Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to require that the Legislature authorize counties to levy a local option sales tax to supplement community college funding; requiring voter approval to levy the tax; providing that approved taxes will sunset after 5 years and may be reauthorized by the voters.

MICHIGAN: Proposal 08-2 A Proposal to Amend the State Constitution to Permit Human Embryo and Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research in Michigan. This is what it says: you would be voting to allow or disallow stem cell research.

MONTANA: I-155 Healthy Montana Kids Plan Act. I-155 establishes the Healthy Montana Kids plan to expand and coordinate health coverage for uninsured children under the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), the Montana Medicaid Program, and employer-sponsored health insurance. The State Health Department may: raise income eligibility levels for children under CHIP and Medicaid; simplify transitions between CHIP and Medicaid coverage; provide assistance for children in employer-sponsored insurance; and work with health care providers, schools, organizations, and agencies to encourage enrollment of uninsured children. Funding for I-155 will come from a share of the insurance premium tax and federal matching funds.

NEBRASKA: Affirmative Action Ban The object of this petition is to place on the general election ballot an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Nebraska to prohibit discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis or race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting by the state or any of its agencies, institutions or political subdivisions.

OREGON: Measure 58 Prohibits Teaching Public School Student in Language Other Than English for More than Two Years. Ballot Measure 58 amends Oregon statute to prohibit teaching non-English speaking public school students in a language that is not English for more than one to two years. Presently, local school districts are required to provide programs based on research for the learning of English as nonnative speakers. Those programs now are provided until such time as students are assessed as "English proficient."

Under the measure, students who do not understand English may attend English immersion classes for a limited time before being taught only in English. English immersion is not defined by the measure and will require the Oregon legislature to determine what comprises English immersion and what effect that definition will have on instruction in the non-English language. Further, the legislature will have to address the effect of this measure on compliance with relevant federal laws.

Students entering a public school in kindergarten through grade 4 may attend English immersion classes for no more than one year. Students entering a public school in grades 5 through 8 may attend English immersion classes for no more than one and one-half years. Students entering a public school in grades 9 through 12 may attend English immersion classes for no more than two years. After one to two years, English language learners will be mainstreamed, regardless of whether they are English-proficient.

SOUTH CAROLINA: Amendment 1 Age of Consent. This amendment deletes the section of the Constitution which says an unmarried woman must be fourteen years old or older in order to consent to sexual intercourse. Deleting this section would allow the state legislature to set the age of consent. Currently, the state legislature has the age of consent set at sixteen for most cases.

SOUTH DAKOTA: Initiated Measure 11 Reinstate Prohibition Against Abortion. Measure 11 would prohibit all abortions performed by medical procedures or substances administered to terminate a pregnancy, except for: abortions medically necessary to prevent death or the serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily organ or system of the woman; and abortions to terminate a pregnancy of less than 20 weeks resulting from rape or incest reported to law enforcement.

When an abortion is performed as a result of reported rape or incest, the woman must consent to biological sampling from herself and the embryo or fetus for DNA testing by law enforcement.

Want to have a look at the ballot for your state in advance, so you can know how to vote before you go? You can see sample ballots for each state by clicking here, or look up the ballot measures for your state here

You may have recently seen an email floating around called "Why Women Should Vote" summarizing some of the struggles of suffragists who won us that right.

It is a good account, an important account, and I'd implore you to take a look at it if you haven't already.

Remember, it was not until 1920 that women were granted the right to go to the polls and vote.

The women were innocent and defenseless, but they were jailed nonetheless for picketing the White House, carrying signs asking for the vote.

And by the end of the night, they were barely alive. Forty prison guards wielding clubs and their warden's blessing went on a rampage against the 33 women wrongly convicted of 'obstructing sidewalk traffic.'

They beat Lucy Burns, chained her hands to the cell bars above her head and left her hanging for the night, bleeding and gasping for air.

They hurled Dora Lewis into a dark cell, smashed her head against an iron bed and knocked her out cold. Her cellmate, Alice Cosu, thought Lewis was dead and suffered a heart attack. Additional affidavits describe the guards grabbing, dragging, beating, choking, slamming, pinching, twisting and kicking the women.

Thus unfolded the 'Night of Terror' on Nov. 15, 1917, when the warden at the Occoquan Workhouse in Virginia ordered his guards to teach a lesson to the suffragists imprisoned there because they dared to picket Woodrow Wilson's White House for the right to vote. For weeks, the women's only water came from an open pail. Their food--all of it colorless slop--was infested with worms.

When one of the leaders, Alice Paul, embarked on a hunger strike, they tied her to a chair, forced a tube down her throat and poured liquid into her until she vomited. She was tortured like this for weeks until word was smuggled out to the press.

So, refresh my memory. Some women won't vote this year because-- why, exactly? We have carpool duties? We have to get to work? Our vote doesn't matter? It's raining?

In that same vein, I've something else for you to take a look at.

Not unlike many people who do social work, Jane Addams has always been a particular shero of mine. As a child, there was a series of illustrated children's books in our library about great women in history: each book was a colorful biography of a given woman and what she had done. (I'd give my left arm to recall the name of the series and find old copies.) I loved these books, and checked out every one again and again, but I was most drawn to the one about Jane Addams, perhaps because so much of her work took place in my own city with families so much like ours, perhaps because even as a young girl, I felt a pull to the kind of work Addams did, and the kind I'd wind up spending so much of my life doing myself.

The following is an excerpt from a speech by Addams in 1915, reprinted as a pamphlet, where she is speaking about why women having the right to vote is so important. While it is in so many ways clearly coming from a different time -- those "old obligations" refer to a woman's place being solidly cemented as only in the home -- in many others (to a degree that's almost disturbing, given nearly 100 years have passed), it remains timely and pertinent.

To those of my readers who would admit that although woman has no right to shirk her old obligations, that all of these measures could be secured more easily through her influence upon the men of her family than through the direct use of the ballot, I should like to tell a little story.

I have a friend in Chicago who is the mother of four sons and the grandmother of twelve grandsons who are voters. She is a woman of wealth, of secured social position, of sterling character and clear intelligence, and may, therefore, quite fairly be cited as a "woman of influence." Upon one of her recent birthdays, when she was asked how she had kept so young, she promptly replied: "Because I have always advocated at least one unpopular cause." It may have been in pursuance of this policy that for many years she has been an ardent advocate of free silver, although her manufacturing family are all Republicans!

I happened to call at her house on the day that Mr. McKinley was elected President against Mr. Bryan for the first time. I found my friend much disturbed. She said somewhat bitterly that she had at last discovered what the much-vaunted influence of woman was worth; that she had implored each one of her sons and grandsons; had entered into endless arguments and moral appeals to induce one of them to represent her convictions by voting for Mr. Bryan; that, although sincerely devoted to her, each one had assured her that his convictions forced him to vote the Republican ticket! She said that all she had been able to secure was the promise from one of the grandsons, for whom she had an especial tenderness because he bore her husband's name, that he would not vote at all. He could not vote for Bryan, but out of respect for her feeling he would refrain from voting for McKinley. My friend said that for many years she had suspected that women could influence men only in regard to those things in which men were not deeply concerned, but when it came to persuading a man to a woman's view in affairs of politics or business it was absolutely useless. I contended that a woman had no right to persuade a man to vote against his own convictions; that I respected the men of her family for following their own judgement regardless of the appeal which the honored bead of the house had made to their chivalric devotion. To this she replied that she would agree with that point of view when a woman had the same opportunity as a man to register her convictions by vote. I believed then as I do now, that nothing is gained when independence of judgment is assailed by "influence," sentimental or otherwise, and that we test advancing civilization somewhat by our power to respect differences and by our tolerance of another's honest conviction.

This is, perhaps, the attitude of many busy women who would be glad to use the ballot to further public measures in which they are interested and for which they have been working for years. It offends the taste of such a woman to be obliged to use indirect "influence" when she is accustomed to well-bred, open action in other affairs, and she very much resents the time spent in persuading a voter to take her point of view, and possibly to give up his own, quite as honest and valuable as hers, although different because resulting from a totally different experience. Public-spirited women who wish to use the ballot, as I know them, do not wish to do the work of men nor to take over men's affairs. They simply want an opportunity to do their own work and to take care of those affairs which naturally and historically belong to women, but which are constantly being overlooked and slighted in our political institutions.

In a complex community like the modern city all points of view need to be represented; the resultants of diverse experiences need to be pooled if the community would make for sane and balanced progress. If it would meet fairly each problem as it arises, whether it be connected with a freight tunnel having to do largely with business men, or with the increasing death rate among children under five years of age, a problem in which women are vitally concerned, or with the question of more adequate streetcar transfers, in which both men and women might be said to be equally interested, it must not ignore the judgments of its entire adult population. To turn the administration of our civic affairs wholly over to men may mean that the American city will continue to push forward in its commercial and industrial development, and continue to lag behind in those things which make a City healthful and beautiful.

You know what to do.