Photo by John Nelson, courtesy of All* Above All

Last week, Representatives Barbara Lee (D-CA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and Diana DeGette (D-CO), proposed the groundbreaking Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance Act, or the EACH Woman Act.

The EACH Woman Act would overturn the Hyde Amendment, which was adopted shortly after Roe v. Wade in 1976 and bans the use of Medicaid funds for abortion. It would also repeal laws in 25 states that prohibit private insurers from covering abortion care.

After Roe, legislators like Henry Hyde couldn’t ban abortion outright. Therefore, they decided to limit who could access abortion by taking away funding for it. These legislators understood that without access, there is no choice. They knew they would be preventing poor people from accessing a constitutionally protected medical procedure. This is what the EACH Woman Act seeks to stop; truly making Roe the law of the land.

This is the first time congress members have brought forth comprehensive legislation to restore insurance coverage for abortion, instead of simply trying to fight off bills that further restrict access to reproductive health care.

In a statement on Facebook, Rep. Barbara Lee wrote, “I introduced a bill so every woman, no matter her income, can make the reproductive health decisions that are right for herself and her family.”

The EACH Woman Act has already been co-sponsored by 70 members in the House– including Texas’ own Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, and Rep. Beto O’Rourke–and would ensure that any person with health insurance through the federal government would have access to abortion care, regardless of their zip code or income.

Currently, if you’re too poor to afford an abortion or have insurance in a state that strictly restricts abortion coverage, people either don’t get an abortion or they find another way to get one, oftentimes finding dangerous means to do so.

Banning abortion coverage through Medicaid has not made abortion disappear. As Rep. Schakowsky stated, “Roe v. Wade wasn’t the beginning of abortion–it was the end of women dying from abortions.” Rather, it was supposed to be.

Restrictions on safe abortion have become widespread across the US, leaving millions of people with insurmountable barriers to care, disproportionately affecting women of color and low income women.

“Latinas and other women of color are more likely to experience an unintended pregnancy and less likely to pay for an abortion out of pocket,” said Jessica González-Rojas, executive director of the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, one in four women who are on Medicaid and cannot afford an abortion are forced to carry their pregnancy to term. Those who are unable to access abortion care are three times more likely to fall into poverty than those who can afford it.

For those who argue that most people do not want taxpayer dollars to go towards abortion care, the data says otherwise.

A survey conducted by Hart Research Associates found that 56% of voters “support a bill that would require Medicaid to cover all pregnancy-related care, including abortion.”

The survey also concluded that three in four voters, including 62% of Republicans, agreed that “as long as abortion is legal, the amount of money a woman has or does not have should not prevent her from being able to have an abortion.”

The EACH Woman Act reflects not only the policy changes voters would like to see, but also make access to reproductive health care a reality for millions of people and allow them to take control of their future.

“Each and every day, the rights of women are under attack in America – today, we push back because every person has a right to health care. This legislation would ensure that every woman can access ALL of her health care options, regardless of how much money she earns or where she lives,” said Congresswoman Barbara Lee. “Regardless of how someone personally feels about abortion, none of us, especially elected officials, should be interfering with a woman’s right to make her own health care decision just because she is poor.”

“Graciela’s family lived in a tiny town—her step-father worked for the police department and everyone knew everyone. Her step-father was physically abusive to both Graciela, her mother and her two younger siblings.

“We can’t report anything to the police about what he does to us,” Graciela said. “He’ll just hurt us more.”

Graciela was terrified of what he might do if he found out she was pregnant, and she didn’t think it was right to bring a baby into her violent home.”

This is one of many true stories from Janes who have called the hotline in Texas which provides legal assistance to pregnant minors. 

“Janes” on the Capitol steps. Photo by Heather Busby

Over the weekend, activists clad in hospital gowns gathered at the Texas Capitol to protest a bill that would strip a vital protection for some of the most vulnerable in Texas–pregnant minors.

Under current law, a person under the age of 18 cannot get an abortion without the consent of a parent or legal guardian. Most teens who get abortions are able to do so with consent from their parents, but for a small number–between 200 and 300–this is simply not an option. These minors are called Janes.

In 1999, judicial bypass was adopted by the state of Texas with bipartisan support, and it allows a judge to grant Janes abortion access without the notification or consent of the parent(s).

If a Jane is in danger of facing physical, sexual, or emotional abuse as a result of notifying their parent, or has no parent to give consent, judicial bypass is in place to help them.

HB 3994, authored by Rep. Geanie Morrison (R-Victoria), would alter the judicial bypass system, making abortion for minors incredibly difficult to access.

Morrison’s bill would add the following restrictions:

• Requires minors to provide “clear and convincing” evidence that obtaining consent from a parent could put them in harms way, increasing the burden of proof. The original language in the law requires only a “preponderance of evidence.”
• Requires minors to file their applications for judicial bypass with a judge in their home county, unless the county has a population under 10,000, or the county in which the abortion provider is located. The current law allows minors to file applications in any county.
• Requires doctors to ask any person seeking an abortion for a government-issued ID. The doctor can still perform the abortion without an ID, but will then be required to report it to DSHS.
• Requires doctors to notify the parents if they perform an abortion on a minor in the event of a medical emergency.
• Extends the time frame for judges to rule on a case from two days to five.
• States that if the judge fails to rule on the bypass request within those five days, that means the request is denied. The current law states that the bypass is considered approved if a judge does not rule.
• Requires county clerks to make public the names of judges who grant bypasses, removing the confidentiality of this system.

Some proponents have stated this bill will close up “loopholes” in the current law. The Texas Alliance for Life, which worked closely in drafting this legislation, claims it will protect parental rights. During debate on the House floor, Morrison argued, “It would be traumatic for a teen to have an abortion without her parents there.” Some have even gone so far as to claim these minors are purposefully going through the court system just to lie to their kind, loving parents.

Anti-abortion politicians have stooped so low in their attempt to eradicate safe, legal abortion access they have blinded themselves to the reality of who these laws were created to protect, even if it means putting teens, sometimes even children, in unconscionable situations. Legislators who drafted HB 3994 did not consult organizations like Jane’s Due Process, which provide legal representation to Janes seeking a judicial bypass.

“Janes” in the Capitol rotunda. Signs read “Age 15, Undocumented,” “Age 15, Incest,” “Age 14, Rape Survivor.” Photo by Heather Busby

One “Jane” activist explained this is exactly why the #HereforJaneTX movement was launched.

“It is time to stand up and elevate the untold stories of Janes across Texas. Each Jane is different, and every reason they need help is valid.”

She and other “Jane” activists stood in the Capitol holding signs with the ages and circumstances of real Janes who have used the current judicial bypass system.

The reasons Janes need this system are numerous. Often times these minors face severe abuse at home, or their parents may be deceased, incarcerated, or are abusing drugs and simply aren’t around. Some Janes are survivors of rape or incest, homeless, or are undocumented.

Without an effective, expeditious judicial bypass system, Janes in Texas will be left with few options and more vulnerable than ever.

To learn more about this legislation and ways to take action through this grassroots movement, visit the #HereForJaneTX website. For more information about the judicial bypass process, visit Jane’s Due Process, a non-profit which provides legal representation to pregnant minors.

If you haven’t spent the last two months panic-stricken by media reports that Ebola will spread from Dallas to kill us all, you might have come across the scandal known as Gamergate.

What is Gamergate? At this point: whatever you want it to be. Corruption or Sexism. Choose your own adventure. Most Houston game developers and journalists want to stay the hell out of it, and for good reason. It’s not hard to lose your job for having an opinion.

I contacted several Houston-based game developers for this story. Two responded.

“That’s a big fat *NO* on the Gamergate opportunistic sound bite,” one said. “You should write that everyone had years of me bringing actual game and tech news that has gone ignored, and now that this *thing* is trending you’re wanting some kind of opinion/statement.”

The second agreed to talk under anonymity.

“The whole debate on both sides seems to have poisonous elements. I’ve tried to stay out. Giving it more attention would just add fuel to the fire. I need to get back to work,” they said before adding: “OH GOD EVERYTHING IS TERRIBLE WHY ARE PEOPLE SO MEAN TO EACH OTHER, PLEASE EVERYONE JUST BE NICE.”

A quick Twitter search turned up similar:

“Avoiding Gamergate. I like video games and craft beer. I lead a simple semi-freelance life., tweeted Houston Chronicle blogger Cody Hardin.

[UPDATE: As of Oct. 20, Houston Chronicle video game reporter Willie Jefferson wrote a very objective piece on his LinkedIn account titled “A simple solution to Gamergate: R.E.S.P.E.C.T.” which was later posted on the Chron’s blog.]

One of the few Houston video game journalists who would talk, a brave soul by the name of Bryan Dupont-Gray, told me the following:

“I honestly could care less about Gamergate at this point,” Dupont-Gray said. “Recent news about a few of their bad apples making death threats has made me feel so removed from them. The only concern I have with this movement is it’s scattered, and when you have a large group of people with no leader, you have a scatterbrained effect.”

Full disclosure (journo speak for “being a professional”) Dupont-Gray and I worked at the same student newspaper two years ago.

Attempts to find anti-Gamergate protesters in H-town were unsuccessful, but a Houston-based activist and gamer who had a few relations in the now-defunct Timegate studios did respond to an interview request. The activist, who goes by @PwnParrot, thinks developers just want to work in peace.

“I started off slightly on the other side. Saw the Polygon article ‘Bad time to be a gamer’ about some misogynists attacking a female dev and thought it sounded awful,” @PwnParrot said. “Later I found the link to the Internet Aristocrat video. I did step back and look at both sides. It looked like people just talking past each other. It still is, in many ways.”

When I asked PwnParrot about their relation to the industry, PwnParrot identified as “a consumer.”

“I’m a PC and Nintendo gamer. Play a lot of FFXIV, I don’t play games as much as I used to. I really didn’t even identify as a gamer until I saw the ‘Gamers are Dead’ articles and found them insulting.”

And that’s Houston. You want the mainstream answer to “What is Gamergate?” Simply punch a few keywords into Google. Not that you’ll get a the truth that way.

The journalism industry’s handling of Gamgergate is confusing as hell. They’re fixated on death threats. For a group proud about how it tells both sides, we sure love to demonize the unpopular. How so? By pointing out death threats sent only to anti-Gamergate protesters. The death threats sent to those in Gamergate? Deep sixed.

And for an opportunity to prove gamers also received death threats, feel free to call up Portland’s police department and ask the public information officer about report 1484066.

Wait, I forgot: Don’t mention harassment aimed at Gamergate. Their death threats are less equal than anti-Gamergate. I mean, we all know how Gamergate is full of angry (negative noun) and (unpopular adjective) losers.

To nudge a biased narrative is one thing but to claim victory in an attempt to shut up the opposition? That’s beyond yellow journalism. Gawker Media (heavily involved in the scandal) did just that when they used several of their sites to say Gamers/Gamergate are dead and encouraged everyone to block/ignore/ban anyone who disagrees. Is this what journalism has come to? Thoughtcrime? Thinkpolice?

Meanwhile, any outlet that interviews both sides receives a rude awakening. Huffpost Live discovered this in the second week of October. After a segment that included an  anti-Gamergate game developer, they interviewed three female pro-Gamergate supporters: Georgina Young, a staff writer at Gamesided, and gamers Jennie Bharaj and Jemma Morgan. All three pointed out that if Gamergate WERE about attacking women, the three of them wouldn’t be there to interview.

Good to Huffpost for maintaining standards. More than what CNN did. Matter of fact, about the only other news sources that did their objective jobs were TechCrunch with their “A tale of Two Sides” piece by Allum Bokhari and National Public Radio’s “On Point” which interviewed several people for and against. Everyone else, from VICE to Stephen Colbert (Wikileaks is pro-Gamergate, if that matters) basically went with the politically correct one-sided story. If you point that out however, you’re not objective. You’re sexist.

Have you screen-capped hastily deleted tweets from a moral crusader bullying a gamer? You’re a misogynist. Pointed out how media are speaking with only one side? You’re pro-rape. Mentioned it in the comments section of Jezebel, Kotaku or basically anything owned by Gawker? Comments disabled — and you’re a bigot. Started a thread about it on 4chan? Thread deleted, you’re banned and a neckbeard loser aspie.

Point is, Gamergate is a teaching moment for how close we are to censoring people for no crime other than hurting someone’s feelings. This issue is past video games and feminism. It’s now freedom of thought. Gatekeeping in the media. Social Righteousness. The ability to discuss, debate, argue, bitch, moan, flame and complain. As in, one of the most basic human rights: Speech. The media says this argument is an excuse to target women under the guise of journalistic reform and anti-censorship. So you’re virtually allowed three options:

1-Oppose Gamergate, become a social justice hero.

2-Support Gamergate, become a boogeyman.

3-Ignore Gamergate, worry about rent money, Houston traffic and Ebola.

Or as one Houston Chronicle opinion writer told me: Oh barf.

They ran like bugs fleeing bug spray. They grabbed their children and ran. They fell in heaps, gasping for air, their lungs and their eyes on fire.

Pregnant women birthed stillborn babies as they ran.  There’s photos to prove it. [Go ahead and click that link — no graphic images, just text, I promise.]

In the thirty years since, more than 15,000 additional people have died from lingering effects of the poison. Thousands more will pass the remainder of their lives blind, sick, and in pain.  Every single moment for the remainder of their wretched lives.

In the thirty years since, Dow/Union Carbide have continued to draw in billions of dollars in profits ($4.8 billion in 2026 alone), but they have yet to admit responsibility, properly compensate victims and survivors, or even clean up the abandoned plant (which continues to contaminate the groundwater.)  Their CEO, Warren Anderson, fled criminal prosecution in India, and is living a cushy life on easy street in New York’s Hamptons.

The Bhopal Disaster — the worst industrial disaster in the history of the world, was not the result of an accident or a mistake — it was the result of criminal negligence. Dow (Union Carbide) was fully aware of faulty safety equipment, but the billion-dollar corporation just could not be bothered to spend a few bucks ensuring the safety of the community where its operations lay, nor the safety of its workers, while raking in the billions.

In 2026, they did pay out a $470 million settlement, which comes out to about $500 per victim.  When asked about that paltry sum, Dow spokesperson Kathy Hunt said that $500 is “plenty good for an Indian.”

But what does this have to do with the University of Houston, its new stadium, and UH’s (Indian-American) President?  Well, last week, the University of Houston announced that it had sold the naming rights to its new sports stadium to the Texas Dow Employees Credit Union for 10 years, for $15 million. Check out this passage from the press release:

“With TDECU, we have a great friend of the University that shares our philosophy, values and mission. When two winning teams come together, great things happen,” said University of Houston President Renu Khator. “TDECU Stadium is a powerful symbol of our commitment to athletics and student success that will bring together faculty, staff, students, alumni and the city of Houston. We cannot thank TDECU enough for helping us to make this gift possible.”

[…]

“From the beginning of this process, we have been very strategic with how we chose our naming rights gift. We wanted an entity that aligned with our core values, cared about its workforce and its clients, invested in the community and the University. We’ve found that and more with TDECU,” said University of Houston Vice President for Intercollegiate Athletics Mack Rhoades.  [Emphasis added.]

Now, don’t get me wrong, I think it’s great that the Texas Dow Employees Credit Union, which has $2 billion in assets, is so generously supporting UH athletics even though so many Dow employees (and Dow’s neighbors) are sick from various cancers due to chemical exposure. I also think it’s great that UH has built a new stadium costing $120 million (well, only $105m after you subtract TDECU’s “generous” $15m contribution) at a time when it has raised tuition 25% since 2026.

Surely, I need not remind you of Dow’s practice of buying “dead peasant” life insurance on its employees, which list the company as the beneficiary of a deceased former-employee’s life insurance policy (rather than that employee’s family). So, Dow takes out life insurance policies on its workers, exposes those workers to hazardous chemicals, and then it gets a check when the poor wretch dies.

Aren’t they rad? Isn’t it great how they “share the philosophy, values, and mission” of the University of Houston?  Watch out world — when winning teams come together!  Shame on UH President Renu Khator for giving Dow Chemical this opportunity to green-wash their image after they said that $500 for a lifetime of suffering is “plenty good for an Indian.” Some Indians require $15 million, I suppose.

But wait–let’s look at President Khator’s last sentence again. “We cannot thank TDECU enough for helping us to make this gift possible.”  Am I the only one confused by this? Who is giving what gift to whom? Khator’s sentence implies gratitude on the part of UH for TDECU making it easier for UH to bestow a gift on TDECU. The fuck? Who is the “us” in the latter half of the sentence? It’s UH, right, because Khator speaks on behalf of UH. So…TDECU helped UH give TDECU a gift?  It just doesn’t add up — it’s like some kind of circular circle-jerk.

Anyway, the subject of naming stadiums and public monuments has been on my mind ever since Enron Field became Minute Maid Park.  Here is a status update that I shared on Facebook just a few days before the UH/TDECU announcement while I was on a road trip through the Midwest:

Louisville, KY has one stadium named for Kentucky Fried Chicken and another named for Papa John’s pizza. My hometown has a stadium named for a soft drink (Minute Maid Park) that was originally named for a corporation (Enron) that turned off grandmas’ lights (rolling blackouts in CA in 2026) even as it looted grandmas in an unregulated utilities environment (fabricating power plant catastrophes to jack up prices, por ejemplo). Papa John is a dickhead (net worth: $600m) who says he can’t afford to buy his workers health insurance because it will cost him $0.14 per pizza.  (Forbes has calculated that number closer to a nickle a pizza.)

Many years ago, when I first learned of the name change from Enron Field to Minute Maid Park, I asked my friend, “Remember when we used to name big public buildings and monuments after people we admired? What happened?”

“We ran out of them,” he said with a smirk.

But not really. There are tons of people I admire, who inspire me to better myself. Most of them are not famous (no celebrities and dramatic scumbags on “reality” TV) but there’s still a lot of them.

Anyway, Colonel Sanders chose 11 herbs and spices because 10 is too round of a number.

And let’s not forget that the Rockets’ old stadium (the Summit) became Compaq Center and then Lakewood Church ™.

So a few days later, after that Facebook post and after UH/TDECU made their announcement, I tracked down one of my heroes: Diane Wilson.  Wilson is a fourth-generation shrimper and a political organizer/activist who, since 1989, has been fighting Formosa Plastics, Union Carbide, and Dow Chemical (since their merger with Union Carbide) in her hometown of Seadrift, Texas.  She is a grandmother and a real, down-to-earth, rural, blue-collar bad ass whose very existence debunks the stereotype of environmentalists being out-of-touch, urban elitists with lots of book-learning but lacking in hands-on, real-world, practical experience.  She has been arrested close to 20 times, been on at least five hunger strikes, climbed a 70-foot tower, chained herself to it, and dropped a banner reminding Dow of their criminal negligence, been called an eco-terrorist by the Coast Guard for trying to sink her shrimp boat on top of the pipe where Formosa Plastics was pumping poisons right into the bay. She has been arrested more times and done more time in prison than the corrupt executives and managers at chemical plants and the politicians who help them cover up their crimes put together.

“It’s like a blow to the stomach,” says Wilson about the UH/TDECU announcement. “It’s like the world is upside down.”

I am not a UH alumnus, but I nonetheless propose renaming the Cougars’ new stadium the Diane Wilson Memorial Stadium.  Now there’s a heroine we should all be proud to claim! I recommend you head down to that great local socialist institution, the public library, and check out Wilson’s amazing autobiography, An Unreasonable Woman.  It reads like a cloak-and-dagger thriller, with leaks from whistle-blowers too scared to lose their jobs, leaks from executives wracked by guilt because their grandchildren were born with birth-defects due to their own chemical waste, corrupt politicians, corrupt regulators, small-town elite making deals with notorious, internationally-known polluting scofflaws, scores of dead dolphins washing up on the beach, and worst of all, attempts to buy off Wilson.

That last bit — her refusal to sell out, is really what earns Wilson my eternal gold star.  Too many people I know are willing to compromise, to make a deal with the devil as long as they get their own cushy position. In the first third of the memoir, Wilson tells how the Boss Hogg like local banker came down to the fish house where she worked in his three-piece-suit one day, asking why she had called for a town meeting to discuss their county being listed as number one for toxic waste in all the US.  That’s all she did — call for a meeting, and that was enough to raise the ire of the town’s elite.

A few days later, she went to the bank on a work errand and her cornered her again. Said he’d talked to the people at Formosa Plastics and they were willing to create a “community group” with her as the chairperson. She could give off the aura of oversight, call herself chairperson, have nominal oversight, rubber stamp whatever the company wanted, and draw a generous salary for herself.  In a town where she was quickly becoming a pariah, he offered her “respectability.”

But Wilson refused to be their pawn, and in the 25 years since, she’s learned just how corrupt the whole system really is.  She talks about the alphabet soup of regulatory agencies which do nothing but rubber stamp plans drawn up by industry. She is leaked information (as I mentioned) by employees who fear losing their jobs in the short-term more than their health in the long-term, by low-level government inspectors whose attempts to enforce existing laws are thwarted by their superiors, by higher-ups in the company who are wracked by guilt.  She is betrayed by family members, scorned by her town, rebuffed by her “elected representatives,” yet she persists, against all odds.

I cannot emphasize this enough, especially for those who insist on “working within the system” — Wilson has no such delusions.

“Hard core civil disobedience is the only way to go,” says Wilson. “I tried talking to the politicians. I wrote letters to my representatives, at every level — local, state, federal. I gathered signatures on petitions.  I tracked down evidence and took it to the regulators.  All I learned is that they were all in cahoots with one another — tipping one another off as to what I was up to.”

“Even Ann Richards,” Wilson adds, “she was supposed to be one of the good ones. Even Ann Richards wouldn’t talk to me.”

Wilson fought back.  She fought back against Formosa Plastics, which came to Seadrift because they had been forced out of their home in Taiwan for their awful record of pollution, she fought back against Union Carbide, whose Seadrift plant blew up in 1991, seven years after the Bhopal disaster, she fought back against President Bush in his rush to war and against the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay.  She hasn’t yet managed to close Guatanamo or end the Iraq war, but she has won zero-discharge victories from Dow and Formosa.[Note: The technology for zer0-discharge, which means capturing and safely storing hazardous chemicals at their origin, thereby preventing them from poisoning the air, land, and water, that technology has existed for a long time. Zero-discharge was the goal of the US Clean Water Act of 1972, and all plants were mandated to be zer0-discharge by 1985. We are still not there — because these companies would rather pay fines and/or buy off judges, regulators, and politicians rather than implement these simple, existing technologies.]Despite this, like a true hero, Wilson remains humble. “When people ask me how I did it,” she says, “I tell them all they have to do is pick up the phone. You don’t need a 501(c)3 and grants and a grand plan. Just take the first step, and the road will rise up to meet you.

For the UH alumni in our readership who find this stadium name offensive, I suggest you follow Wilson’s advice and drop her a line here or tweet at her here:  https://twitter.com/UHpres

[UPDATES:  Here are a couple videos you might enjoy.  The first is a BBC interview with one of the Yes Men, a San Francisco-based activist/prankster group who made international headlines on the 20th anniversary of the Bhopal Disaster by successfully impersonating a Dow executive making apologies and promising amends on an international newscast (more details here and Dow’s hilarious response here).  The second video is the first installation in a 30 min short documentary about Diane Wilson called TEXAS GOLD.]

In the “Soul Sister” episode of Comedy Central’s satirical cop show “Reno 911”, an officer is shown wielding a folding yardstick to enforce the six-foot regulation between a dancer and her customer. As a result, they must flirt their star signs through the officer translating from his post between them. It ends with officer and customer bonding over fishing, while the dancer disappears, unnoticed by either man. I laughed my ass off.

Last October, a decidedly unfunny thing occurred in my community. A local cantina, unused and boarded up, was part of a human trafficking bust where underage girls were bought and raped, then beaten by their captors. The Houston Chronicle story reported that neighbors–my neighbors–witnessed over 20 underage girls being led out of the club. Thirteen men were caught, but one, Alfonso Diaz-Juarez, remains a fugitive. He’s still on Harris County’s most wanted list, and human trafficking is still one of Houston’s most pervasive problems. But my community received no response or awareness to the threat in our backyard.

Last November, Mayor Annise Parker’s office published a press release announcing the settlement of a 16-year-old lawsuit with several strip clubs and other sexually oriented businesses (SOBs). Lawsuits flew when Houston approved an ordinance restricting SOBs’ proximity to schools and churches, a three-foot rule for dances and even what defines a sexually oriented business. So finally, Houston settled to drop the three-foot lap dance rule and allowed more nudity, table dances and so on.

In return for bare breasts, the suit-happy SOBs gave up their private rooms (where the drug deals and the prostitution and the rape usually happen). They cannot hire or contract anyone accompanied by another person who “speaks for her, holds her identification, collects her pay … or appears to exercise control, force or coercion over the person.” (Which, really? Really, SOBs?) The clubs must adhere to strict drug and prostitution background checks. They must provide “annual human trafficking awareness training and disseminate materials regarding human trafficking awareness” to their staff. And on top of that, SOBs must collectively contribute $1,000,000 to fund a human trafficking unit within Houston Police Department’s Vice Division.

Should a club fail to do their part, the 1997 ordinance will go into effect. This hurts the SOBs in two ways: the SOB loses the competitive edge of freedom from 1997 regulations, and the other SOBs now have to pay a bigger share of their lucrative trade to fund the Human Trafficking Unit. So it’s in everyone’s interest to work with law enforcement.

In a city with such a huge trafficking problem, Houston has only had a human trafficking task force comprised of officials from different organizations, like the FBI. Which is great, but its members could not focus exclusively on human trafficking.

“This is an opportunity to do something truly effective,” said Council Member Ellen Cohen, former director of the Houston Area Women’s Shelter, who championed funding for Houston’s 6,600 rape kit backlog last year. “It’s a reasonable policy to deal with … well, there’s no word bad enough for those who think of humans as commodities.”

For Cohen, the trade is a fair one. “The three-foot rule was never enforced,” she said. “It couldn’t be. You’d have to have a huge number of officers in these SOBs, just sitting there.”  The rules around covering women up were also difficult to enforce, especially as dancers wore pasties, paint and liquid latex to get around the law.“What we gave up was something we couldn’t enforce anyway,” said Cohen.

Meanwhile, Houston couldn’t enforce human trafficking violations either, or fund a properly trained unit. As a result, assaults were underreported and unaddressed, fueling our position as an ideal hub for human trafficking. Houston Police Department Captain Charles Dunn, who has worked with trafficking task forces, told Houston Chronicle that “Without a doubt, a large portion of human trafficking takes place in the sex industry. . .”

It is troubling, as a Houston lifer, that the unit has to be funded this way and not through, say, the usual channels of community or the city or other businesses, the way such things usually go (I think). Some religious and women’s rights advocates agree, saying the settlement makes Houston vulnerable, that it sends the wrong message or that the city has made a ‘deal with the devil.’ The New York Times reports The Houston Area Pastor’s Council may sue the city.

“SOBs exist because there is a demand for them,” says Cohen in response. “If we really want to be free of SOBs, we need to teach young women to base pride on their skill sets, not how they look–and we need to teach young men to appreciate women as equals and not people there for personal gratification.”

Others question whether (and when) the city will enforce the new regulation to all SOBs, instead of the 16 involved in lawsuits against the 1997 ordinance.

“In one way, I see and understand the controversy of it,” says Dunn. “Looking at it another way, it makes sense the industry is taking part itself to take care of this problem occurring in this industry.”

The Progressive Forum is a non-profit, civic speaker organization in Houston dedicated to presenting and bringing us the great minds of people who do groundbreaking work to advance our culture and democracy. They have hosted guest speakers such as Rachel Maddow, Jane Goodall, and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Last week their guest of honor was one of Texas’ own, activist and inspiration, Cecile Richards.

Growing up with a badass role model, former Texas Governor Ann Richards as her mother, it’s no surprise Cecile has accomplished so much. She founded the Texas Freedom Network, was founder and president of America Votes, was deputy chief of staff to U.S. Representative Nancy Pelosi, and is currently the President of Planned Parenthood and an outspoken leader in the fight for reproductive rights and health care here in Texas and across America.

Cecile used this forum to discuss the wonderful advances women have made over the past 50 years and how access to health care, family planning, and birth control is central to women’s success and even shared tear-jerking stories of the patients Planned Parenthood has helped. She also highlighted the recent trend across America, led by extremists who have high-jacked the Republican Party, to defund family planning services and revoke women’s reproductive rights all together. She stated, “I look forward to the day true Republicans are in control of their party again.”

It was nice to see Cecile inherited her mother’s famous wit. After referencing Glenn Becks classic claim that only ‘hookers’ rely on Planned Parenthood, she boldly stated “Yes. Hookers do come to Planned Parenthood and we are proud to serve them.” She also called out Mike Huckabee for his most recent blundering mistake of alienating half the population when he ridiculously explained the popular use of oral contraception being due to women’s inability to control their libidos and needing  a creepy “Uncle Sugar” to fund them. She made a point to mention, in spite of the extreme conservative’s efforts, “thanks to the ACA, 27 million women get birth control fully paid for by their insurance plan.”

When asked if her mother passed on any advice that may be useful to Wendy Davis and Leticia Van de Putte, who are running for Governor and Lt. Governor of Texas this year, she spoke about how “Tuff, Tuuuuuffff” her mom was when dealing with the double standards and often sexist criticism women face when running for public office, something Senator Wendy Davis is no stranger to, and stated “If Ann Richards, a divorced woman, a recovering alcoholic, a liberal can get elected as governor of Texas, then Wendy Davis can too.”

As we have seen recently, our anti-choice state leaders have developed a new, sneaky trend of adding abortion regulations and clinic restrictions to almost any bill or budget plan that passes their desk. Last summer in Texas, this tactic did not go unnoticed. With the help of the internet and social media, within hours the history-making People’s Filibuster was formed and hundreds- eventually thousands of activists repeatedly fled to the capitol to testify to try to prevent HB 2 from passing. When Wendy Davis took Texan’s voices to the Senate floor during her 11 hour personal filibuster, the whole world watched from their computers as it streamed live. Cecile discussed how our ability to communicate instantly has created a new face of activism and while not all of us are “burning bras or picketing, young people are taking action every day.”

The fight for reproductive rights and equal access to healthcare is far from over, but as Cecile said, the solutions are political and last year “Texas lit a fuse that is not going out”.

Be sure to keep your eye on Cecile Richards and the Progressive Forum for the opportunity to hear from more great minds and innovative leaders visiting Houston.

by Kathryn McGranahan
Art by Blake Jones

Everything we have been told about the clitoris is wrong. As a result, everything we know about the vagina, orgasms, and lady parts in general, is wrong too.

The little “button” the clitoris has been defined by is actually just the tip of the iceberg. It’s called the clitoral glans, and it belies the complex internal structure within. The internal clitoris really consists of two crura wrapping around the urethra, and two corpora cavernosa wrapping around the vagina. What we’ve called a vaginal orgasm is really the internal clitoris engorging around the vagina to induce orgasm.This structure wasn’t fully discovered until 1998, and was definitely not discussed in my high school’s sexual education class.

The Museum of Sex states in a Sexology 101 blog post, “The sad fact is it wasn’t until the 1990s that researchers began using MRI to study the internal structure of the clitoris.  By then, the intricate details of the penis were already well known.”

This lack of study and awareness on female genitalia–and the power structures enforcing it–is now represented in large scale in New York City artist Sophia Wallace’s Cliteracy project. The project addresses the physical and the social through multi-media, street art and a pretty sexy rodeo with a rideable golden clitoris.

“Cliteracy is a project that deals with a paradox,” explains Wallace. “Everywhere we go, we see sexualized images of women’s bodies … and the female body as a subject, whether it’s in the history of art, or it’s in advertising used to sell products.”

And yet, she says, these sexualized images don’t affirm cisgendered or transgendered female stimulation, “We’ve only learned about the anatomy of the clitoris in the past 15 years. There’s a crisis where women are not actually having pleasure despite the fact that their sexualized bodies are everywhere.”

The main crux of the piece is her “100 Natural Laws of Cliteracy”, a list spanning 10-feet by 13 feet and aglow by the 6-foot neon CLITERACY sign hanging above. “Natural laws are inalienable,” Wallace told magazine CREEM. Cliteracy’s natural laws include affirmations like “The hole is not the whole” and “Clitoris YES”, next to dark facts, including, “The World Health Organization estimates between 130-140 million women have been brutalized by female genital mutilation in the last 10 years.”

That fact hits a major nerve in the battle for female genital mutilation, which often severs or disfigures partial or total external female genitalia. The World Health Organization estimates over 18 percent of these procedures are performed by healthcare providers, and the number is rising.

Until recently, only one doctor was known to fully repair these women’s mutilated clitorises. Dr. Pierre Foldes told The Museum of Sex in 2026 that he was shocked by the clitoris’s lack of attention in the medical field, “For three centuries, there are thousands of references to penile surgery, nothing on the clitoris, except for some cancers or dermatology–and nothing to restore its sensitivity.”

Dr. Foldes and his partner Dr. Odile Bouisson also presented the first 3D sonogram of the erect and inerect clitoris. They did this without proper funding for three years.

But Wallace’s Cliteracy project is about more than educating the mainstream about the clitoris. Wallace wants to examine the language and mentality behind our illcliteracy. “What I want people to get from … Cliteracy, is to talk about the clit, to think about the clit [and] to treat the clit on equal terms as the penis,” Wallace says. “All the language that we have in English in terms of profanity goes back either to female genitals or the idea of what happens to them.” To wit, one of her Natural Laws highlights the origin of the word ‘vagina’: It’s from a Latin word vāgīna meaning literally “sheath” or “scabbard”.

To Wallace, language is one of the most influential barometers of social pressure on female sexuality. “So think of the words ‘cunt’ ‘twat’, ‘pussy’, “fuck you motherfucker” [and] ‘faggot’. What are these words about, right? It’s about the shame of having female genitals, and it’s about the shame of what happens to these genitals. And this idea that being on the receiving side of penetration is a shameful act, there’s something done to your body that makes you less and less worth. We need more language, and we need to get outside of this frame and we definitely need to stop … thinking that the only way to talk about the female body is to destroy it.”

After Wallace’s first exhibit of 100 Natural Laws of Cliteracy, she says, it went viral on Tumblr. “Within two weeks I had 20,000 reblogs,” she says. “So people had a huge response.”

Wallace’s project now extends to a giant billboard in New Mexico and street art plastered across New York City, in what Wallace calls an advertising campaign for the clitoris. She and fellow artist Kenneth Thomas also held The Clit Rodeo at The Wassaic Project Summer Festival. Riders straddled a large clitoris in front of Wallace’s 100 Natural Laws display while judges evaluated dexterity, generosity and style with signs like “Don’t Stop!” and “Right There!”

“It wasn’t just women on the clit, it wasn’t just the men,” Wallace told The Huffington Post. “Everyone was engaged.”

Wallace also said she wants to take the Clit Rodeo on the road. And what better place for a rodeo than Houston?

This article ran in the December 2026 edition of FPH.

By Amanda Hart

Illustration by Blake Jones

It appeared nothing short of a miracle when the 83^rd Texas Legislature came to an end in May and not one of the 24 anti-choice bills had even made it to the floor for debate. Pro-choice activists and women all over the state slept a little easier that night knowing that women and their families weren’t going to, at least for now, be forced back into the dark ages.

We didn’t mess with immigration, abortion laws, voting laws, or school vouchers during the regular session. The anticipated tooth-and-nail moral debates were almost nonexistent on the floor this year. The 83^rd Legislature was so calm, in fact, that the media began referring to it as the “Kumbaya Session.” For months, Texas Republicans received coverage from the media claiming that the “War on Women” in Texas was over and that they had no desire to debate abortion this session.

Nevertheless, Gov. Rick Perry gave the dark ages a fighting chance when he added abortion-related legislation to the special session docket. The special session is a form of life support for legislation that is deemed too important to not act on before our legislators are dismissed for another two years. This year’s special session was called to order with the main focus centered on redistricting maps. The district maps that were drawn in 2026 during the 82^nd Texas Legislature were found by federal judges to be discriminatory against minority voters. Republicans used the special session as a chance to redraw the districts to their liking instead of using the maps handed down by the courts.

Also during this special session, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst used his position to disable the normal two-thirds majority vote that is needed to debate a bill. With this rule change, a simple majority is all that is needed to pass legislation. The Republicans thought that with the simple majority rules in place they had the special session on lock. Their confidence was emboldened by their new source of power. With two weeks remaining, Perry, at the request of Dewhurst, placed abortion-related legislation on the special session docket. A sneaky move when combined with the newly made simple majority rules.

The supposed “Kumbaya Session” proved to be nothing more than a decoy. It didn’t take long for the Senate to take up the pro-life stance on the floor. The proposed legislation was drafted and presented by conservatives under the guise that they want to protect women. Senate Bill 5 (SB5), authored by state Sen. Glenn Hegar, R-Katy, would have banned abortion at 20 weeks, mandated that doctors who perform the procedure have admitting privileges at a hospital within a 30 mile radius of the clinic, required all clinics to become ambulatory surgical centers (ASC), and demanded that abortion-inducing drugs be administered directly by a physician. SB5 effectively took all the harmful bills that never made it to the floor for debate during the regular session and rolled them up into one omnibus bill. When broken down to its core, the regulations proposed in SB5 would have had a catastrophic effect on the lives of Texas women and their families.

Poor rural women and families will experience the brunt of any anti-choice legislation. Lack of access to reproductive care is already plaguing many Texas families due to previous attacks from legislators. Mandatory, costly, medically-unnecessary ultrasounds, 24-hour waiting periods when seeking an abortion, and defunding the Texas Women’s Health Program during the last legislative cycle have already taken their toll on our communities. The future of women in Texas is also impacted by the decision of legislators to reject $100 billion in federal funds to expand Medicaid to over 1.5 million uninsured Texans.

According to the 2026 census data, 30 percent of women and 15 percent of children were uninsured. The poverty rate for female-headed families with children was 42 percent, and 53 percent of all poor children lived in female-headed families. The census also found that women working full-time, year-round were paid an average of 70 cents for every dollar paid to their male counterparts. During the regular session, Gov. Perry was given an opportunity to address the poor socioeconomic state of Texas women through legislation that would have protected women from wage discrimination. Instead of signing what should have been straightforward equal pay for equal work legislation, Perry opted to veto the bill citing, “smart regulations and fair courts is a large part of why we continue to lead the nation in job creation” in his veto statement. This bill would have made it easier for Texas women to challenge their employers when they choose to discriminate against women and pay them lower wages than their male counterparts. The current operating system is in the business of keeping women trapped in poverty, and anti-choice legislation has the same, but deadlier, impact.

Currently, there are 42 abortion clinics operating in the state of Texas. SB5 would have closed down all but five of the current operating clinics. Forcing clinics to become ASCs is not just medically unnecessary, it is also costly and involves 117 pages of red tape. Only four Texas cities, San Antonio, Dallas, Houston, and Austin, would be left with an operating clinic. A little over 13 million women live in Texas and only 2.8 million reside in one of these four cities which means Texas Republicans just put 78.5% (10.3 million) of Texas women at risk of not having safe and legal access to their constitutional right to decide what is best for them and their families.

Even if a woman was lucky enough to live near one of the aforementioned cities, she may still be faced with significant time and financial constraints. Yet, the women most affected by this bill would have been those residing in rural areas such as the Rio Grande Valley or the Panhandle. To illustrate, if you reside in El Paso the closest of the four previously-mentioned cities to you is San Antonio–a 1,100-mile trek round-trip. Distance and costly travel expenses are further exacerbated by issues such as the mandatory 24-hour waiting period and the cost-prohibitive, medically-unnecessary ultrasound bills that passed during our last legislative cycle. These obstacles combined with the new restrictions that demand abortion-inducing drugs be administered in person, as well as requiring women to return to the same doctor two weeks later for a checkup (normally any clinic or OB/GYN for a checkup was acceptable) reveal just some of the ways in which many of our state legislators are trying to shut off access to abortion under the pretense that this legislation is beneficial to women’s health and safety.

Hundreds of pro-choice supporters showed up on the steps of the State Capitol, foiling the plans of the Texas Republicans. On the day the House Committee on State Affairs was to vote this extreme anti-abortion legislation out of committee, over 700 citizens from all over the state of Texas showed up to the Capitol and signed up to speak for their allotted three minutes. In a matter of hours, the Texas Legislature had an unexpected, almost unheard of, citizens filibuster on their hands. This went on until 4 a.m. when the House State Affairs Committee chairman Rep. Byron Cook (R-Corsicana) cut them off despite there being hundreds of people left waiting to speak. The following day, Rep. Cook called a back-alley meeting in a room that could only hold 30 people and quickly voted to open up the bill for debate on the floor.  At that point, it became apparent that the best chance state Democrats had to block this legislation was to run the clock out on the session.

The filibuster began in the House where Reps. Jessica Farrar, Dawnna Dukes, Senfronia Thompson, and many others continued the debate as long as they could before a vote was forced on the floor. If Texas Republicans truly cared about women they would have listened with sincerity to the hours of citizen testimony that was given, as well as to the pleas from concerned democratic legislators who drafted thoughtful amendments to help ease the burden SB5 would surely impose. Pleas that asked for amendments to allow exceptions to these rules for girls and women who were victims of rape or incest. Pleas for exceptions to the rules for women who are at risk of dying due to their pregnancy. Pleas to accept federal money to expand Medicaid and to restore the Texas Women’s Health Program. Pleas that would have allowed just one clinic to remain open in West Texas. Pleas to enact a statewide sex education class. Pleas to not force girls and women to have to seek solutions across the border, via underground abortion clinics or through dangerous self-inducing tactics. Not one heart-wrenching plea for amendments was given consideration by the state Republicans who were instead playing on their phones, sleeping, and joking around with each other. High fives were had by many Republican representatives when they finally passed the bill in the wee hours of morning.

When it became clear that it was headed to the Senate for passage, Sen. Wendy Davis announced her plans to finish the filibuster by talking as long as necessary to ensure SB5 would not pass. Sen. Davis spoke continuously without water, food, sitting, or bathroom breaks for 11 and half hours. Republican senators were visibly shaken at her perseverance as they tried repeatedly to strip Davis of her voice to speak for Texas women everywhere. Finally, after some questionable rulings, Dewhurst alerted Davis that her filibuster was over. The crowd inside and out of the Capitol began chanting, “Let her speak.” When silence was restored inside, Sens. Kirk Watson, Judith Zaffirini, and Leticia Van de Putte picked up the filibuster torch.  They used the rulebook in hopes that they could run the remaining 50 minutes down on the clock to that magical stroke of midnight that would officially bring the special session to a close. Watson, Zaffirini, and Van de Putte all did their best to hold their ground but a mere 12-minutes shy of success they too were stopped short of their goal. With over 200,000 people streaming the proceedings live, something magical happened. The citizens inside the Senate, who had restrained themselves from outbursts all day, relit the filibuster torch and marched it to the finish line with nothing but the strength of their voices.

This was a collaborative effort on the part of so many democratic legislators who are owed a great deal of gratitude.  But it was also the collective voice of the people demanding to be heard and respected that ultimately clinched this victory. Texas women and their supporters reminded our legislators that the power of the people will always prevail and that their utter disregard for the rights and lives of women will not be taken away without a fight. Our Republican representatives learned a hard lesson when they decided to take on women and men who are fighting with their hearts and minds on the side of justice. There is no strength greater than that of a united community that stands beside their women. The war on women is not over, but the strength of Texas women this legislative cycle proves that it will be soon.