Economic Woman

Feministing has pulled a beautiful little quote out of an abstinence-only education website:

Virginity is an asset that holds its value well.

Click over for a witty comment thread. I also have a few thoughts, because it’s late at night.

1. What rate is it taxed at?
2. But seriously, folks. What value does virginity store? Purity? The gains from marriage to a God-fearing mate?
3. Even accepting the premise: since virginity is relatively easy to lie about, it should in fact be a very unreliable store of value.
4. Past a certain point virginity begins to lose its value. Definitely by 40 you’re facing some sort of opportunity cost in holding this asset.

Unfortunately, abstinence only education is not any sort of asset.

(The headline is a tribute to this, obviously.)

Feministing recently put me on to Feminist Finance, and I’ve been poking my way through the archives with pleasure. It’s sort of difficult to explain what this blog is about. It’s loosely organized around finance for women, I guess, but without the irritating self-help nonsense that tends to come with budgeting tips. And there are some posts on pay equity and the dynamics of marriage that would fit in just fine on this site. So you should check it out. Here’s a little welcome post to get you started.

…expect more on-topic posts. For starters, I’m working my way through this Econ Journal Watch forum on women in economics, and I expect I’ll have a response.

I also think I may work on subverting the unwritten code that says bloggers may not discuss an article or issue more than week old. There are several links that I didn’t get around to posting over the last month, but some are still important, so I’m going to take a print magazine approach and forge ahead with my out-of-date opinions.

This morning I read that New York Times magazine article about Cease Fire, an outreach program tackling the cycle of gun violence and retribution in Chicago. I won’t gush until I’ve seen some numbers, but it struck me as the sort of intellectual inspiration, pragmatism, and people that makes for great public policy.

Then this evening I read about this ass-backwards plan to encourage the police to hound youth on Britain’s council estates. (The headline: “Police should harass young thugs – Smith.”)

As part of the crackdown on bad behaviour, [Home Secretary Jacqui Smith] will urge police forces across the country to follow the example of Essex police, who have mounted four-day “frame and shame” operations by filming and repeatedly stopping identified persistent offenders on problem estates.

The programme in Essex has been successful, even though it may raise human rights issues about such tough tactics, especially if those harassed by the police have not been found guilty of any criminal offence.

Since it’s my expertise, let’s talk about sloppy reporting. What is “success” in this situation? A reduction in violent crime rates? Fewer arrests? Positive feedback from local residents? A glowing review in the local paper? Can we really get away with not narrowing this down?

On areas well beyond my expertise: what do you imagine these “identified persistent offenders” are more likely to do after receiving this sort of treatment: join a group like Cease Fire, or go out and shoot a cop?