Showing posts tagged: Women

  • The Architecture Of Abortion: How Providers Build Their Own Buffer Zones | Via
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Massachusetts law allowing for a 35-foot buffer zone outside clinics offering abortions. The law, which builds off of a similar one in Colorado, went into effect in 2007 and provided a fixed, no-go zone around women’s reproductive health clinics. The buffer zone, which was supported by local law enforcement, limited the proximity of pro-life protestors to the women and the staff entering the facility, thus diminishing public safety concerns.
And public safety is a serious concern. While Roe v. Wade remains legally intact and secures the right to an abortion in the United States, clinic violence represents one of the greatest deterrents to women and to providers. The National Abortion Federation (NAF) has tracked reported cases of violence against clinics since 1977, and the long list of incidents includes eight murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, 181 arsons, as well as thousands of cases of criminal activity like kidnapping, stalking, and a rash of attacks using butyric acid. Add to that the daily affronts of picketing, obstruction, and intimidation, and you can understand why Vicki Saporta, president and CEO of NAF, said in a statement last week that “buffer zones work” in protecting people.
The SCOTUS ruling serves yet another blow to those hoping to provide safe and accessible reproductive health services to women. While other building types have benefited from the expertise of architects when addressing public safety issues—think, for instance, of the architectural interventions around safety, wayfinding, and crowd control at hospitals, federal buildings, courthouses, and stadiums—reproductive health care clinics rarely see that kind of design support. Clinics are left to fend for themselves and, as a result, are forced to create ad hoc buffer zones where architectural and legislative options have failed to deliver.
  • The Architecture Of Abortion: How Providers Build Their Own Buffer Zones | Via
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Massachusetts law allowing for a 35-foot buffer zone outside clinics offering abortions. The law, which builds off of a similar one in Colorado, went into effect in 2007 and provided a fixed, no-go zone around women’s reproductive health clinics. The buffer zone, which was supported by local law enforcement, limited the proximity of pro-life protestors to the women and the staff entering the facility, thus diminishing public safety concerns.
And public safety is a serious concern. While Roe v. Wade remains legally intact and secures the right to an abortion in the United States, clinic violence represents one of the greatest deterrents to women and to providers. The National Abortion Federation (NAF) has tracked reported cases of violence against clinics since 1977, and the long list of incidents includes eight murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, 181 arsons, as well as thousands of cases of criminal activity like kidnapping, stalking, and a rash of attacks using butyric acid. Add to that the daily affronts of picketing, obstruction, and intimidation, and you can understand why Vicki Saporta, president and CEO of NAF, said in a statement last week that “buffer zones work” in protecting people.
The SCOTUS ruling serves yet another blow to those hoping to provide safe and accessible reproductive health services to women. While other building types have benefited from the expertise of architects when addressing public safety issues—think, for instance, of the architectural interventions around safety, wayfinding, and crowd control at hospitals, federal buildings, courthouses, and stadiums—reproductive health care clinics rarely see that kind of design support. Clinics are left to fend for themselves and, as a result, are forced to create ad hoc buffer zones where architectural and legislative options have failed to deliver.

The Architecture Of Abortion: How Providers Build Their Own Buffer Zones | Via

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Massachusetts law allowing for a 35-foot buffer zone outside clinics offering abortions. The law, which builds off of a similar one in Colorado, went into effect in 2007 and provided a fixed, no-go zone around women’s reproductive health clinics. The buffer zone, which was supported by local law enforcement, limited the proximity of pro-life protestors to the women and the staff entering the facility, thus diminishing public safety concerns.

And public safety is a serious concern. While Roe v. Wade remains legally intact and secures the right to an abortion in the United States, clinic violence represents one of the greatest deterrents to women and to providers. The National Abortion Federation (NAF) has tracked reported cases of violence against clinics since 1977, and the long list of incidents includes eight murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, 181 arsons, as well as thousands of cases of criminal activity like kidnapping, stalking, and a rash of attacks using butyric acid. Add to that the daily affronts of picketing, obstruction, and intimidation, and you can understand why Vicki Saporta, president and CEO of NAF, said in a statement last week that “buffer zones work” in protecting people.

The SCOTUS ruling serves yet another blow to those hoping to provide safe and accessible reproductive health services to women. While other building types have benefited from the expertise of architects when addressing public safety issues—think, for instance, of the architectural interventions around safety, wayfinding, and crowd control at hospitals, federal buildings, courthouses, and stadiums—reproductive health care clinics rarely see that kind of design support. Clinics are left to fend for themselves and, as a result, are forced to create ad hoc buffer zones where architectural and legislative options have failed to deliver.

Why Did the BBC Photoshop Patty Hopkins Out of This Image? | Via
Architect’s Journal has reported on an embarrassing – and controversial – fumble from the BBC. Not only has the media outlet been criticized for “largely ignoring women architects in its series The Brits Who Built the Modern World,” but it’s now come under fire for an image (appearing at the beginning of episode 3) in which Patty Hopkins is photoshopped out of a group that includes her husband Michael Hopkins, Norman Foster, Richard Rogers, Nicholas Grimshaw, and Terry Farrell.
The six architects are featured in RIBA’s tie-in-exhibition; however, as the series chose to focus on the five male architects, the photographer removed Ms. Hopkins from the shot (unbeknownst to the BBC).
Lucy Mori of KL Mori Business Consulting for Architects told Architect’s Journal: ‘I am shocked that women’s contribution to architecture has again been “airbrushed” from this populist history programme.”

Why Did the BBC Photoshop Patty Hopkins Out of This Image? | Via

Architect’s Journal has reported on an embarrassing – and controversial – fumble from the . Not only has the media outlet been criticized for “largely ignoring women architects in its series The Brits Who Built the Modern World,” but it’s now come under fire for an image (appearing at the beginning of episode 3) in which  is photoshopped out of a group that includes her husband Michael Hopkins, Norman FosterRichard Rogers, Nicholas Grimshaw, and Terry Farrell.

The six architects are featured in RIBA’s tie-in-exhibition; however, as the series chose to focus on the five male architects, the photographer removed Ms. Hopkins from the shot (unbeknownst to the BBC).

Lucy Mori of KL Mori Business Consulting for Architects told Architect’s Journal: ‘I am shocked that women’s contribution to architecture has again been “airbrushed” from this populist history programme.”

Call for Denise Scott Brown to be given Pritzker recognition
In a speech prepared for the AJ Women in Architecture lunch, Scott Brown called on her role in Robert Venturi’s 1991 win to be acknowledged retrospectively. Describing it as a ‘very sad’ situation, she said: ‘They owe me not a Pritzker Prize but a Pritzker inclusion ceremony. Let’s salute the notion of joint creativity.’ —architectsjournal.co.uk

Call for Denise Scott Brown to be given Pritzker recognition

In a speech prepared for the AJ Women in Architecture lunch, Scott Brown called on her role in Robert Venturi’s 1991 win to be acknowledged retrospectively. Describing it as a ‘very sad’ situation, she said: ‘They owe me not a Pritzker Prize but a Pritzker inclusion ceremony. Let’s salute the notion of joint creativity.’ —architectsjournal.co.uk

Woman Suffrage Parade of 1913 via wiki
The Woman Suffrage Parade of 1913 was a march down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C. on March 3, 1913, organized by the suffragist Alice Paul for the National American Woman Suffrage Association. The march was scheduled on the day before President Woodrow Wilson's inauguration to “march in a spirit of protest against the present political organization of society, from which women are excluded”, as the official program stated.

Woman Suffrage Parade of 1913 via wiki

The Woman Suffrage Parade of 1913 was a march down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C. on March 3, 1913, organized by the suffragist Alice Paul for the National American Woman Suffrage Association. The march was scheduled on the day before President Woodrow Wilson's inauguration to “march in a spirit of protest against the present political organization of society, from which women are excluded”, as the official program stated.