This is the Fourth Wave
September 25, 2008
by Sheryl Lee
|Marilyn Fitterman sent us the following via email:
Oh My What Am I To Do?
These are truly difficult times in the history of our nation, especially for a curmudgeon such as I. As a certified curmudgeon it is expected that I find the misery in a situation and spread that around. So, here I go. What am I to do about this presidential election?
On one side we have an old man whose IQ is probably his shoe size. However, some think the fact that he was tortured for five years qualifies him to run a country. And he insists upon control of women’s uteri by not leaving us choice. WOW talk about macho.
And, his running mate is the antithesis of what women for equality have worked for all these years. She believes that it’s perfectly O.K. to use a woman’s body as a ward of the state. No abortion, no choice, not even in cases of rape or incest. She says that it’s a blessing for her seventeen-year- old daughter to have a child. And this after our government has been pouring millions of dollars every year into trying to convince children not to have children, be it through condoms or abstinence. Where did she come from?
On the other side we have a charismatic non-entity with absolutely no experience and no history of promoting nor speaking out for, women’s rights. Furthermore he has in fact promised millions of dollars more to faith-based programs, i.e., religious groups that fervently oppose reproductive freedom and lesbian/gay civil rights. All this with our tax dollars.
Obama’s running mate, who is probably the best of all four candidates, still leaves some things for a curmudgeon to complain about. For instance, does anyone remember the terrible time Biden gave Anita Hill, in not believing her? Then we got stuck with Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court. And, didn’t Biden say he opposed abortion funding for poor women? And now, not to be a killjoy, even though a curmudgeon, this election cycle has been the catalyst for dividing some of the longest existing women’s organizations in the country. Sisters are fighting with sisters, mothers fighting with daughters, women’s groups fighting, not only amongst themselves, but with each other. Long term friendships have been shattered.
Oh my, what what am I to do?
~o~o~o~o~o~o~o~
Amy Siskind responds:
Here’s What WE Will Do.
Dear Marilyn,
It starts when we are little girls: The acting out against each other. The ganging up. The subtle and not-so-subtle undermining of school-mates and even close friends. Girls can be very mean to other girls.
Given such antagonistic beginnings, is it any wonder that when we become women, we still don’t know how to look out for each other? Most of us never learned how. It’s not what we were taught.
When McCain picked Palin, I found my inbox flooded by emails from the women who had been critical of Hillary for being part of the old establishment, or for not being likable enough. Now these same women were emailing me about Palin and her inexperience, her issues (many of which were factually incorrect), and how dare McCain pick a woman, anyway!
I have had enough. This has to change starting TODAY. Starting today, we have to learn to look out for each other, to support each other and to teach our daughters to do the same.
A mother wrote to me at The New Agenda:
I have four daughters, the youngest is 14. Yesterday she turned to me and said she didn’t think women should be in politics anymore, that men would not let them win. That was disturbing, especially coming from the child who at age 11 volunteered on her own to work on a city council campaign and at one time said she wanted to become President.
This girl isn’t overreacting. She’s a teenager. She’s seen the lay of the land and she wants no part of it. But this is not what we want for her, nor for our own daughters.
So how are we combat this? There’s only one way: We have to PUT WOMEN FIRST! Here’s how we do that:
- We become resolutely non-partisan (e.g. each party has to earn our vote).
- We leave the discussion of reproductive rights for later.
The issue of choice has been used to divide women. It has been used to deny us power, and to hold our votes hostage for far too long. If we don’t want to lose our self-determination, they tell us, or if we want life to be held as the sacred thing we believe it to be, then we’ll be the good little girls we always are and line up at the voting booth to support the candidate whose vision of our reproductive rights lines up with our own.
The New Agenda is about working together on the issues we have in common. For that reason, we take no official position on choice, and don’t plan to make it part of our platform. There are already many terrific organizations that are devoted to that one issue.
The New Agenda has other business to attend to. With party status and choice set aside, we can all, 100% of us, hunker down and work on women’s rights together. As a non-partisan voting block, we can approach each political party and say: “What can you do for us on women’s issues? What can you do to help women find jobs, job training and childcare? What can you do to reduce and prevent domestic violence? What can you do to promote women’s participation in government and business?
The key is getting women into positions of power. According to the UN Study released last week, when women are in power, women’s issues get attention. It is that simple.
We need to work together. We need to vote for women’s issues and we need to vote for women candidates. Don’t be taken for granted. Be brave. Be bold. Show you daughter that you are proud to be a woman and that she can grow up to be whatever she dreams of—and that her sisters will be at her side to lift her up, not smack her down.
-aim for the pocket book. Alot of women come home stinky, you know, from ah, like working? Hello? You know, like factories and mills and even some poorly ventilated offices and construction sites and other shops and cafes and the like. They really don’t give a shit about the plight of the Palestinians or AIDS in Africa or the rescinding rain forests or sexist media – they’ve got lots of needs they don’t have to be reminded of or have a champion for who slings bright words around ‘on their behalf’. Pay inequity they can latch onto and connect with at a concrete level and so can their mates. There’s your numbers and rank n’ file, your platform, there’s your voters with alot of their men following BEHIND them because a standard of living means more than some woman whose mouth is taped shut on some computer screen. Gimme’ a break! I know a number of women for whom the Sarah Palin Action Doll means as much as an empty milk carton used up by children. So many years ago when some women burned their bras, I figured they would next hit the offices and unionize the mass of clerical workers and then reach deeper into the service industry but it didn’t happen. I think this is the last shot, that only women can pull this nation back from the brink because it sure the hell is my gender that put us all here.
Goesh, the bra-burning thing is a myth.
And I have a damn hard time believing any women don’t care about sexism in the media, when it shapes our lives and our world so profoundly. What do you think helps perpetuate the attitude that we aren’t worth equal pay?
Hello Fourth Wave. I’m confused about your mailings on the subject of “pro-life” women who “support Roe. ” No such thing is possible. Historically , the dreadful and politically-selected misnomer “pro-life” has always applied to those who oppose choice, not those who oppose abortion.
It is perfectly possible to personally oppose abortion and yet decline to impose this perspective by law on all the women in the country. So one can be “anti-abortion” and “pro-choice.” That has always been the case, and in fact most pro-choice Catholic legislators take this position, i.e, “my religious opinion should not be legislated upon others.”
But “pro-life” is a definite political term that means anti-Roe and anti-choice. We should not confuse this issue, as confusion is the goal of the anti-choice movement.
SandyRapp@aol.com
I really don’t understand how this works. Each party has to earn our vote…but the Republicans have already earned it, simply by nominating a woman? Are we not to criticize women’s policy positions?
What do you think helps perpetuate the attitude that we aren’t worth equal pay?
I believe it’s complex, but part of it is the belief that whatever else women are, our primary value is as nurturers, not providers. Sarah Palin gave a long, long speech in which she was sure to describe herself as “just a hockey mom”, “just one of many moms”, she went into huge detail about her family — to me that suggested that the party is selling her as a stay-at-home mom who just happened to fall into a career (the only non-shameful way to be a career woman, in their eyes); as George W. Bush in a skirt suit with a baby on her hip. They made sure to list her credentials — not just political but personal: married to her high school sweetheart (not a dirty slut), five children (not “selfish”), sees John McCain as a Real Man, “the man I want” in the White House (not challenging male authority, at least not REALLY). They welcome her because she “proves” women don’t need the ERA, don’t need maternity leave, don’t need choice, don’t need anything better at all. She’s successful, isn’t she?
I am not falling for it. Mock my handwringing if you like, I’m not falling for it.
I remember when Ferraro ran and the terrible sexist jokes that were so common then.
The jokes may have changed over the years (some not so much) but given that they’ve been made at the expense of both Clinton and Palin, who seemingly have nothing in common but gender, Occam’s Razor tells us why.
Clinton was too old, too wide hipped, too saggy, too naggy.
Palin is too young, too sexy, too perky, too hot.
Clinton was mocked and judged for her dowdy pantsuits.
Palin’s skirts are too tight and short.
Clinton wasn’t much of a homemaker.
Palin wastes taxpayers money cooking her family dinner.
Clinton’s hair was too short, too frumpy.
Palin’s hair is too high, too beauty pageant contestent.
Clinton only got where she is because of her husband.
Palin only got where she is because she’s a woman.
Clinton is inexperienced compared to Obama. She may have 8 years in the Senate and 8 years of full time First Lady but that’s not enough and it’s the wrong kind of experience.
Palin is inexperienced compared to Obama. She may have the only executive experience on either ticket (2 years as Governor, 6 as mayor, and Chairman of Alaska’s Oil and Gas Conservation Committee) but it’s not enough and it’s the wrong kind of experience.
But none of this is because their women, their just the wrong women.
Well, who the hell would be the right woman?
If old is bad, then why isn’t young good?
If saggy is bad, you would think they wouldn’t mock perky.
If pantsuits are bad, skirts must be in.. right?
But it’s not. Why?
Do you remember those jokes about Ferraro? The ones about her having PMS and pressing the red button causing WWIII.
Google Palin PMS nuclear button and you’ll know why Clinton and Palin weren’t the right woman.
Because in America, no woman is the right woman for President.
Seriously,
Since you are taking the time to comment all over our website, perhaps take a few moments to read our mission and what we are trying to accomplish.
We are non-partisan and are not endorsing any candidate in this election. We are, however, promoting a platform of women’s issues (listed on our website under goals) to three parties so far (Dems, Repub and Green).
I think there were valid reasons not to prefer Clinton as a candidate.
Palin wastes taxpayers money cooking her family dinner.
Is this a reference to the fact that she took per diem funds intended to be used for travel and applied them to her expenses at her house in Wasilla? Because that’s got nothing to do with her homemaking skills or lack thereof, or whether she was “wasting” the money. The point there is that she wasn’t using the money — public money — for its intended purpose.
I am not saying she isn’t subject to sexism, but all attacks on Palin are not sexist.
Since you are taking the time to comment all over our website, perhaps take a few moments to read our mission and what we are trying to accomplish.
I have read it, but saying you are non-partisan does not make it so.
This post brings up concerns many feminist women (particularly young, single ones for whom choice is still a live personal issue) have about McCain/Palin and mocks them. It scolds women for “tearing women down” and not wanting to vote for the female candidate — in the wake of the Palin nomination. I’m not supposed to read this as a McCain endorsement?
There are contradictions here. For example, it doesn’t make sense to say you take no position on reproductive rights, welcome anti-choice members into your movement with open arms, say nice thing about Feminists For Life (which makes it very clear that they support an outright ban on abortion), then turn around and point out the erosion of reproductive rights as evidence that women’s position in society isn’t what it should be.
Seriously,
The Governor before Palin spent FIVE times as much on a housekeeper as she did feeding her family herself. Why was it okay for a government paid housekeeper to feed her family but not okay for her to do it herself for less? I think she was using taxpayer dollars wisely.
Seriously, as the mother of the 14 year old mentioned, this goes beyond party. The question many are facing is – Are you a woman or a Democrat first? If you are a Democrat before you are a woman than you could very well believe that only a Democrat who agrees with a majority of your ideology should be elected.
If a woman feels she is a woman first before being a Democrat then it comes down to a simple realization. Women benefit when women are elected more than we would benefit from more males being elected. The first woman to do almost anything faced more odds than the ones who came next. The hundreds if not thousands of trailblazing women before us show us what history requires for others to move past whatever barrier it is.
Now you can wait if you want to for 2012 and hope that the Democratic Party decides that they will “let” another woman be that first woman. Or if whoever wins the nomination feels that we are important enough to select a woman to represent the United States for Vice President. Or you can take this one opportunity now, to either vote Green or to vote Republican.
Who ever wins it will take groups like New Agenda to demand that we are heard, for far too many years it’s been a pat on the behind with a “we’ll get to you, honest sweetie, just wait your turn” and I don’t know about you? But I’m tired of waiting.
One of the main reasons I joined was because of the choice issue not being part of the goals. It has been used to divide us and one of the main reasons that most women face the decision of an abortion is related to economics. If we first accomplish the goals set out? For many no matter your position on abortion this will create more choices for women. It’s a sad commentary on our world when the main reason why most of the women I know have had abortions was not because they did not want the baby, it’s been because they felt they could not afford another child.
That to me is not the true definition of choice…
Seriously,
You are right, there are valid reasons not to prefer Clinton as a candidate just as not everyone who prefers McCain over Obama is a racist.
The problem is that Clinton was subject to attacks and comments that had NOTHING to do with her candidacy. These came from both Dems and the media.
I object to the double standard and the patronization. For example, the claim that Hillalry’s experience as First Lady doesn’t count but Obama’s experience as a PART-TIME state senator does and more than equals a full turn in the Senate. Or, when how Palin was ‘sarcastic’ and ‘mean’ when she responded to Obama’s comment belittling her as just a small town mayor.
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
January 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...