My friends who are passionate about the Equal Rights Amendment are unyielding on the subject - we have to have it. I fear a backlash - no, I predict a backlash. Worse, I predict lack of interest, especially among young women who have no idea what it was like before the women's movement took on discrimination, harassment and all the other little things that demean women (we now call them sexism). [Does this mean I will be stripped of my feminist credentials?] On the other hand, I've seen people get really excited that it's back - even younger women, who haven't experience the kind of discrimination their mothers did but nevertheless get that it's crucial to have constitutional protection of all their rights. We might thank George W. Bush for showing them how bad it can get.
In solidarity and in trust of the judgment of those I respect (ie, Ellie Smeal and Virginia NOW women who fought so hard for the ERA in the 80s), I will do everything I can to support the ERA in Virginia - either the three-state strategy of picking up the remaining three states (including Virginia) needed to move the amendment to adoption or the new bill that was introduced July 21 to start all over.
This photo was taken at the press event to announce the new ERA bill, with Carolyn Maloney of NY presiding. Carolyn is a terrific advocate for women and her book is chock full of good information. Jerry Nadler and Sheila Jackson-Lee also gave a huge boost to the cause, although we need some moderate voices - please god, send us a Republican or two with feminist cred to get behind this bill. Terry O'Neill did a good job representing NOW - on her first day as national president. Many thanks to LuAnn Smith for taking photos.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Talking About Sex
We need more talk about sex. Funny coming from me - I never uttered the word vagina until I saw the Vagina Monologues in my 50s (which basically forced me to say it). Did I ever willingly talk about sex to my kids? I shuddered at sex-talk in movies. Clapped my hands over my ears. But once I started talking - relatively recently - it was easy to say all sorts of words that I hadn't said. (What's hard is trying not to get hung up on those words - italicized here. Gotta be an adult.)
A couple of things triggered these thoughts. One was the story the other day about the British goverment issuing a pamphlet recommending sex for teens and for older people as healthy, good exercise, fun. The British?? Exemplars of stiff upper lip. Another was watching the HBO series on John Adams on DVD - the sexual relationship that he and Abigail had was so happy. And they were so horny when they spent time apart. And the July 21 Politico story about those miserable hypocrites in the C Street "Christian fellowship" house - John Ensign, Zach Wamp - and their soulmates, Larry Craig, Mark Foley, David Vitter, Mark Sanford. And their upright enablers - Tom Coburn, Sam Brownback. What's the fellowship about, exactly? Protecting adulterers?
Mostly, though - and here's the feminist bit - it was reading Jessica Valenti's Full Frontal Feminism that did it. I'm reading this book to try to figure out what Third Wave feminists think. So far as I can tell, it's the same as Second Wave Feminism- but bolder, raunchier and definitely with lots more sex. And the more sex words she used, the more I got comfortable.
Jessica and Wave 2 share concerns about reproductive rights, workplace issues (pay and job equity), violence, gender stereotyping, outrageous physical excesses such as obsession with body image (make-up's ok if you like it), politics (get women elected and good men), global issues such as CEDAW, all that stuff NOW and Fem Majority hammer away at all the time. (Did I miss it - no mention of the Equal Rights Amendment. That would be a big departure from Wave 2.)
But Jessica is much more into sex. Major endorsement of masturbation as a sexual norm. Funny piece about words for masturbation. Major section on cultural perversions such as "Girls Gone Wild." Lesbian sex is fun to try, even if you're not lesbian. Feminism makes for better sex, she says - because feminists are into themselves and their bodies and feel (like men) that anything is good in search of an orgasm. (As an aside - this is funny - the mega-bestseller author Nora Roberts says, "a day without [French] fries is like a day without an orgasm.” Make of that what you will.)
Jessica says:
"Feminism tells you it's okay to make decisions about your sexuality for yourself." She also stresses - be responsible.
"And perhaps most important, feminism wants you to have fun. Sex isn't just about having babies after all, despite what young women are being taught."
And this: "Full frontal feminists make sure you can get off."
Now I may be wrong but I really can't recall a NOW conference where we talked about sex in that way, with such enthusiasm. But as I said, I can't recall - so it certainly could have happened before I got involved or I just could have missed it. There was one great Arlington NOW meeting around Valentine's Day where we did a great quiz about love and sex -very pro both. That was fun. But bitching about abortion rights and such isn't talking about sex.
So maybe in re-energizing and re-organizing NOW, we need to talk about sex. Have talk-about-sex parties. Have sex advisers. Share sex tips. Talk sex. Not abortion - not sex ed - SEX.
It would be fun. Like sex, fun is good for you!
A couple of things triggered these thoughts. One was the story the other day about the British goverment issuing a pamphlet recommending sex for teens and for older people as healthy, good exercise, fun. The British?? Exemplars of stiff upper lip. Another was watching the HBO series on John Adams on DVD - the sexual relationship that he and Abigail had was so happy. And they were so horny when they spent time apart. And the July 21 Politico story about those miserable hypocrites in the C Street "Christian fellowship" house - John Ensign, Zach Wamp - and their soulmates, Larry Craig, Mark Foley, David Vitter, Mark Sanford. And their upright enablers - Tom Coburn, Sam Brownback. What's the fellowship about, exactly? Protecting adulterers?
Mostly, though - and here's the feminist bit - it was reading Jessica Valenti's Full Frontal Feminism that did it. I'm reading this book to try to figure out what Third Wave feminists think. So far as I can tell, it's the same as Second Wave Feminism- but bolder, raunchier and definitely with lots more sex. And the more sex words she used, the more I got comfortable.
Jessica and Wave 2 share concerns about reproductive rights, workplace issues (pay and job equity), violence, gender stereotyping, outrageous physical excesses such as obsession with body image (make-up's ok if you like it), politics (get women elected and good men), global issues such as CEDAW, all that stuff NOW and Fem Majority hammer away at all the time. (Did I miss it - no mention of the Equal Rights Amendment. That would be a big departure from Wave 2.)
But Jessica is much more into sex. Major endorsement of masturbation as a sexual norm. Funny piece about words for masturbation. Major section on cultural perversions such as "Girls Gone Wild." Lesbian sex is fun to try, even if you're not lesbian. Feminism makes for better sex, she says - because feminists are into themselves and their bodies and feel (like men) that anything is good in search of an orgasm. (As an aside - this is funny - the mega-bestseller author Nora Roberts says, "a day without [French] fries is like a day without an orgasm.” Make of that what you will.)
Jessica says:
"Feminism tells you it's okay to make decisions about your sexuality for yourself." She also stresses - be responsible.
"And perhaps most important, feminism wants you to have fun. Sex isn't just about having babies after all, despite what young women are being taught."
And this: "Full frontal feminists make sure you can get off."
Now I may be wrong but I really can't recall a NOW conference where we talked about sex in that way, with such enthusiasm. But as I said, I can't recall - so it certainly could have happened before I got involved or I just could have missed it. There was one great Arlington NOW meeting around Valentine's Day where we did a great quiz about love and sex -very pro both. That was fun. But bitching about abortion rights and such isn't talking about sex.
So maybe in re-energizing and re-organizing NOW, we need to talk about sex. Have talk-about-sex parties. Have sex advisers. Share sex tips. Talk sex. Not abortion - not sex ed - SEX.
It would be fun. Like sex, fun is good for you!
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Thank you...
to people who leave comments. I'm thrilled - and flattered - you check out this blog. I'll try to post comment-worthy stuff, nothing trite, no party-lines be they political or social. Let me know what you think.
"Stand By Me"
I've listened to this about a thousand times. It doesn't get old. I love the dad dancing with his daughter, the old man, the stone-faced Moscow cellist, the intense Dutch calypso artist, the dreamily in-sync South Africans. Visualize the tune connecting us all. Feel the hope. (In case you think I'm losing my bitchy edge, as it were- why aren't there more women in this?) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us-TVg40ExM
Sexist Joke of the Day
With thanks to the wonderful Paula of Martinsville for passing this on - and a profound thought - I have to be able to laugh at myself - how about you?
A 16-year-old boy came home with a new Chevrolet Avalanche and his parents began to yell and scream, 'Where did you get that truck???!!!' He calmly told them, 'I bought it today.' 'With what money?' demanded his parents. They knew what a Chevrolet Avalanche cost. 'Well,' said the boy, 'this one cost me just 15 dollars.'
So the parents began to yell even louder. 'Who would sell a truck like that for 15 dollars?' they said. 'It was the lady up the street,' said the boy. I don't know her name - they just moved in. She saw me ride past on my bike and asked me if I wanted to buy a Chevrolet Avalance for 15 dollars.'
'Oh my Goodness!,' moaned the mother, 'she must be a child abuser. Who knows what she will do next? John, you go right up there and see what's going on.' So the boy's father walked up the street to the house where the lady lived and found her out in the yard calmly planting petunias! He introduced himself as the father of the boy to whom she had sold a new Chevrolet Avalanche for 15 dollars and demanded to know why she did it.
'Well,' she said, 'this morning I got a phone call from my husband. (I thought he was on a business trip, but learned from a friend he had run off to Hawaii with his mistress and really doesn't intend to come back). He claimed he was stranded and needed cash, and asked me to sell his new Chevrolet Avalanche and send him the money. So I did.'
Are women good or what?
A 16-year-old boy came home with a new Chevrolet Avalanche and his parents began to yell and scream, 'Where did you get that truck???!!!' He calmly told them, 'I bought it today.' 'With what money?' demanded his parents. They knew what a Chevrolet Avalanche cost. 'Well,' said the boy, 'this one cost me just 15 dollars.'
So the parents began to yell even louder. 'Who would sell a truck like that for 15 dollars?' they said. 'It was the lady up the street,' said the boy. I don't know her name - they just moved in. She saw me ride past on my bike and asked me if I wanted to buy a Chevrolet Avalance for 15 dollars.'
'Oh my Goodness!,' moaned the mother, 'she must be a child abuser. Who knows what she will do next? John, you go right up there and see what's going on.' So the boy's father walked up the street to the house where the lady lived and found her out in the yard calmly planting petunias! He introduced himself as the father of the boy to whom she had sold a new Chevrolet Avalanche for 15 dollars and demanded to know why she did it.
'Well,' she said, 'this morning I got a phone call from my husband. (I thought he was on a business trip, but learned from a friend he had run off to Hawaii with his mistress and really doesn't intend to come back). He claimed he was stranded and needed cash, and asked me to sell his new Chevrolet Avalanche and send him the money. So I did.'
Are women good or what?
Friday, July 17, 2009
You Gotta Read This: "White Guy"
Now I get it! The world through Jeff Sessions' Eyes is...White Men. (Caveat - many people who are White and who are Men transcend that category.) Thank you, Rick Horowitz - White Guy with soul of a Human..no particular race or gender.
Published: Jul 16, 2009
How it looks to Jefferson Beauregard Sessions
BY RICK HOROWITZ
"I will not vote for, and no senator should vote for, an individual nominated by any president who believes it is acceptable for a judge to allow their personal background, gender, prejudices or sympathies to sway their decision in favor of or against parties before the court." -- Sen. Jeff Sessions,(R-Ala), at the Sonia Sotomayor hearings
I am truth. I am certainty. I am facts -- facts as they are, not as some might wish them to be. I am objectivity personified. I am White Guy.
Is this why I hated high school history - it was all about wars - which, far as I can tell, is what history was to the guys who wrote it (Howard Zinn excepted)?
When I see things, I see them clearly, and without distortion of any kind. I see all things, and hear all things, and I overlook nothing. I assign each thing I see, each thing I hear, the importance it deserves -- neither more nor less. My judgment in these matters isn't judgment at all -- it is the simple recognition of reality. Any judgment that differs from mine, to the extent it differs from mine, does not reflect reality. I am White Guy.
Is that why laws often don't make sense to me - they aren't for me and 'my kind' - non-Christian, non-male chauvinist, non-establishment?
My knowledge is total, and has no gaps. If there are things I seem not to know or fully comprehend, it is because these things are not worth knowing or comprehending. I have exactly the knowledge one should have, exactly the comprehension one should have, to make my way in the world. The rest is extraneous. I am White Guy.
Of course - that's why what we often suspect to be important and to need funding - reproductive health care, safe motherhood in Africa, shelters - isn't, or so we're told.
"Call it empathy, call it prejudice, or call it sympathy, but whatever it is, it's not law. In truth it's more akin to politics. And politics has no place in the courtroom." -- Sen. Sessions The rules and practices that appear to benefit me as White Guy are the only possible rules and practices. When I benefit from them, it is because I deserve to, by dint of dedication or hard work or innate talent. When others press for other rules and practices, it is only because they expect that somebody will cut them a break. This conclusion is too obvious to require further explanation. I am White Guy.
Clarence Thomas is White Guy, too.
Because I already know I have no prejudices, it would be a complete waste of time to consider the possibility that I might. Because I have no prejudices, I am confident that my judgments are the only possible judgments. My brain plays no tricks on me. Neither does my heart, or my gut. My experiences are universal experiences, and the lessons I take from those experiences are precisely the same lessons that any reasonable person would take. I am White Guy.
"This 'empathy standard' is another step down the road to a liberal, activist, result-oriented, relativist world where laws lose their fixed meaning, unelected judges set policy, Americans are seen as members of separate groups rather than simply Americans, and where the constitutional limits on government power are ignored when politicians want to buy out private companies." -- Sen. Sessions
"Empathy" is feeling what others feel. Since reasonable people in any circumstance feel exactly what I feel, I already know what others feel. Empathy is superfluous. So is sympathy. I am White Guy.
If laws did not lose their fixed meaning, slavery would be legal. That would probably not bother Sessions.
I hate when questions are raised about the way things are done -- especially when the way things are done is the way things have always been done. Instead of going down that dangerous road of complain and criticize, we should stick to our familiar path, and be thankful that the familiar path has been so helpful to so many of us for so long I have had it up to here with all the sore losers. I am White Guy.
Rick Horowitz is a syndicated columnist. Thank you to Robin Davis of North Carolina NOW for forwarding this from The News & Observer.
Published: Jul 16, 2009
How it looks to Jefferson Beauregard Sessions
BY RICK HOROWITZ
"I will not vote for, and no senator should vote for, an individual nominated by any president who believes it is acceptable for a judge to allow their personal background, gender, prejudices or sympathies to sway their decision in favor of or against parties before the court." -- Sen. Jeff Sessions,(R-Ala), at the Sonia Sotomayor hearings
I am truth. I am certainty. I am facts -- facts as they are, not as some might wish them to be. I am objectivity personified. I am White Guy.
Is this why I hated high school history - it was all about wars - which, far as I can tell, is what history was to the guys who wrote it (Howard Zinn excepted)?
When I see things, I see them clearly, and without distortion of any kind. I see all things, and hear all things, and I overlook nothing. I assign each thing I see, each thing I hear, the importance it deserves -- neither more nor less. My judgment in these matters isn't judgment at all -- it is the simple recognition of reality. Any judgment that differs from mine, to the extent it differs from mine, does not reflect reality. I am White Guy.
Is that why laws often don't make sense to me - they aren't for me and 'my kind' - non-Christian, non-male chauvinist, non-establishment?
My knowledge is total, and has no gaps. If there are things I seem not to know or fully comprehend, it is because these things are not worth knowing or comprehending. I have exactly the knowledge one should have, exactly the comprehension one should have, to make my way in the world. The rest is extraneous. I am White Guy.
Of course - that's why what we often suspect to be important and to need funding - reproductive health care, safe motherhood in Africa, shelters - isn't, or so we're told.
"Call it empathy, call it prejudice, or call it sympathy, but whatever it is, it's not law. In truth it's more akin to politics. And politics has no place in the courtroom." -- Sen. Sessions The rules and practices that appear to benefit me as White Guy are the only possible rules and practices. When I benefit from them, it is because I deserve to, by dint of dedication or hard work or innate talent. When others press for other rules and practices, it is only because they expect that somebody will cut them a break. This conclusion is too obvious to require further explanation. I am White Guy.
Clarence Thomas is White Guy, too.
Because I already know I have no prejudices, it would be a complete waste of time to consider the possibility that I might. Because I have no prejudices, I am confident that my judgments are the only possible judgments. My brain plays no tricks on me. Neither does my heart, or my gut. My experiences are universal experiences, and the lessons I take from those experiences are precisely the same lessons that any reasonable person would take. I am White Guy.
"This 'empathy standard' is another step down the road to a liberal, activist, result-oriented, relativist world where laws lose their fixed meaning, unelected judges set policy, Americans are seen as members of separate groups rather than simply Americans, and where the constitutional limits on government power are ignored when politicians want to buy out private companies." -- Sen. Sessions
"Empathy" is feeling what others feel. Since reasonable people in any circumstance feel exactly what I feel, I already know what others feel. Empathy is superfluous. So is sympathy. I am White Guy.
If laws did not lose their fixed meaning, slavery would be legal. That would probably not bother Sessions.
I hate when questions are raised about the way things are done -- especially when the way things are done is the way things have always been done. Instead of going down that dangerous road of complain and criticize, we should stick to our familiar path, and be thankful that the familiar path has been so helpful to so many of us for so long I have had it up to here with all the sore losers. I am White Guy.
Rick Horowitz is a syndicated columnist. Thank you to Robin Davis of North Carolina NOW for forwarding this from The News & Observer.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
"The Stoning of Soraya M."- Oppression Kills
I just saw the movie. I'm still a little shaky. It's horrific to see the stoning- and sickening to watch the evil unfold that leads to the stoning. The evil includes silence.
But first, let's dispose of the idiotic Washington Post review that called it "the worst kind of exploitive Hollywood melodrama, presented under the virtuous guise of moral outrage." The Post reviewer is a professional film-goer, not a normal viewer. Too bad for the reviewer. There were definitely weak points in the film but that was almost irrelevant, given the monstrous true story it tells. The story of how oppression kills, body and spirit.
Soraya is stoned to death because her cheating husband falsely accuses her of adultery (so he can get rid of her and marry a 14-year-old) and gets one other man to go along with the lie. The village mayor allows the sentence to be imposed, although he's ambivalent and hopes for a "divine" sign that he should stop it. That's the storyline. Now for the meaning - I think it's that oppression kills. Internalized oppression kills because it robs a person of the ability to act in his/her best interest - whether you are a Jew who stays in Hitler's Germany or an Iranian wife who refuses to leave a brutal, violent and ultimately murderous husband or a battered woman or man or a person in a destructive, demeaning job or relationship. You accept your oppression - you may even embrace it. After all, it's your life. The mayor also fell to oppression, but he didn't lose his life - only his soul.
To get away with torture and murder, at least in this case, you also need external oppression - laws and social/religious norms and economic conditions that make it acceptable - ordinary - to deny a person's humanity and degrade him/her. Soraya had no way out - this was her world. The ayatollahs and mullahs said it was so. Someone drew a chalk line around the pit where she was to be stoned to death and she marched into it - this was her world.
About two thirds of the way through the movie I found myself thinking - hell, why doesn't she get out? Run away? Why doesn't she grant him the divorce? [She had excuses - mainly, she and her two daughters would starve without her husband.] I bought into blaming-the-victim: more internalized oppression, on my part.
Victim - an inadequate description. Soraya fell prey to the most horrific excesses of dominance - religious, tribal, political, gender. The men who threw the stones the hardest - as she was tied up and trapped in a dirt pit and helpless to shield herself - were asserting their dominance. Pathetic cowards.
Soraya's murder justified and glorified the oppressive theocratic rule of the ayatollahs. No justice in this regime. Just revenge. And Soraya was an easy target. Besides - the villagers would say (men and women) - she deserved it. Soraya refused to be a "good" wife - refused to submit to the brutal physicality of her cheating husband.
The feminist take-home message is that society can quickly and easily strip you of your humanity if you do not play by the rules and do not have real power and real control. "Real" means you've internalized the values of equality and you have financial resources and political power - and the laws that make those possible. (Caveat - Even with power, we can still lose our rights unless we have a lot of friends in high places who care what we think and how we vote. Will the ERA change that?)
Real equality = real power.
See the movie (in Northern Virginia, it's at Shirlington right now - July 15th) and share your thoughts on this blog.
But first, let's dispose of the idiotic Washington Post review that called it "the worst kind of exploitive Hollywood melodrama, presented under the virtuous guise of moral outrage." The Post reviewer is a professional film-goer, not a normal viewer. Too bad for the reviewer. There were definitely weak points in the film but that was almost irrelevant, given the monstrous true story it tells. The story of how oppression kills, body and spirit.
Soraya is stoned to death because her cheating husband falsely accuses her of adultery (so he can get rid of her and marry a 14-year-old) and gets one other man to go along with the lie. The village mayor allows the sentence to be imposed, although he's ambivalent and hopes for a "divine" sign that he should stop it. That's the storyline. Now for the meaning - I think it's that oppression kills. Internalized oppression kills because it robs a person of the ability to act in his/her best interest - whether you are a Jew who stays in Hitler's Germany or an Iranian wife who refuses to leave a brutal, violent and ultimately murderous husband or a battered woman or man or a person in a destructive, demeaning job or relationship. You accept your oppression - you may even embrace it. After all, it's your life. The mayor also fell to oppression, but he didn't lose his life - only his soul.
To get away with torture and murder, at least in this case, you also need external oppression - laws and social/religious norms and economic conditions that make it acceptable - ordinary - to deny a person's humanity and degrade him/her. Soraya had no way out - this was her world. The ayatollahs and mullahs said it was so. Someone drew a chalk line around the pit where she was to be stoned to death and she marched into it - this was her world.
About two thirds of the way through the movie I found myself thinking - hell, why doesn't she get out? Run away? Why doesn't she grant him the divorce? [She had excuses - mainly, she and her two daughters would starve without her husband.] I bought into blaming-the-victim: more internalized oppression, on my part.
Victim - an inadequate description. Soraya fell prey to the most horrific excesses of dominance - religious, tribal, political, gender. The men who threw the stones the hardest - as she was tied up and trapped in a dirt pit and helpless to shield herself - were asserting their dominance. Pathetic cowards.
Soraya's murder justified and glorified the oppressive theocratic rule of the ayatollahs. No justice in this regime. Just revenge. And Soraya was an easy target. Besides - the villagers would say (men and women) - she deserved it. Soraya refused to be a "good" wife - refused to submit to the brutal physicality of her cheating husband.
The feminist take-home message is that society can quickly and easily strip you of your humanity if you do not play by the rules and do not have real power and real control. "Real" means you've internalized the values of equality and you have financial resources and political power - and the laws that make those possible. (Caveat - Even with power, we can still lose our rights unless we have a lot of friends in high places who care what we think and how we vote. Will the ERA change that?)
Real equality = real power.
See the movie (in Northern Virginia, it's at Shirlington right now - July 15th) and share your thoughts on this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
