Will men dominate Obama administration?
November 15, 2008
by The New Agenda
|Today Politico is reporting that many women’s rights group, including our group The New Agenda, are concerned about Obama appointing an adequate number of women to his cabinet.
Early indications that men might dominate the hierarchy of Obama administration have women’s groups worried, even as a growing chorus of advisers reportedly pushes Hillary Rodham Clinton for secretary of state.
The New Agenda will continue to push for parity in the cabinet:
“It’s appropriate that Obama’s vetting Clinton, but she’s one women,” said Amy Siskind, co-founder of The New Agenda, a nonpartisan women’s rights group founded by former Clinton supporters. “We want to see parity in the representation of women in the Cabinet.”
We certainly do not want Obama to use the consideration of Hillary for Secretary of State to distract from our greater goal of getting women their proper representation in this administation.
We are continuing our all out press on the Transition Team to consider qualified women. You can help us by sending in your suggestions of qualified female candidates for each position. We will also be looking to organize another email writing campaign to relevant Transition Team officials so stay posted.
The New Agenda will continue to work as an increasingly powerful nationwide organization to advance women’s rights!
We also need to be prepared for follow-up e-mail campaigns if female senators like Sen. Clinton are pulled out of Congress and placed in cabinet positions (which would be great). With only 17 female senators, we can’t afford to lose any more.
I agree that the press about Obama considering Sen. Clinton could be used as a distraction.
Personally I would like to see more women not only get involved in politics but have more nonpartisan women working in the media specifically focusing on women’s issues. The media’s treatment of Sarah Palin is an example of why we definitely need more women in places where they can hold the line on such assaults. We need them to raise the issues of Larry Summers and about the now apparent dominance of men in the Obama administration. We need women to ask hard questions. We need more focus on women like Condy Rice as well as Hillary. We need someone on Fox News, CNN and even MSNBC that does not have a partisan agenda.
Since men have dominated every Cabinet, I would expect Obama to follow that pattern. I wonder why this question is even being asked in light of his unwillingness to speak out against the sexist attacks on Hillary and Sarah Palin. Had he spoken out from the start, most of it would not have occured but he didn’t speak out. Am I the only one remembering that little face scratching scenario of his using his middle finger ? The practical facts are just about every Cabinet position could be filled with a competent woman, we all know it and we all know men will dominate. Perhaps the question could be rephrased to ask, ” how many token women will Obama appoint?’ This leads to another consideration: what better way to diminish voices like the New Agenda than to entice someone like Hillary into his Cabinet – the crumbs are larger this time around but the slice of bread from which they fall must be taken, it sure the hell isn’t going to be given. Personal power or real gender equity, where lies the hearts of some of the influential and powerful women in both parties and in our society at large? At some point in time, I think the New Agenda is going to have to hand out a few puppet of patriarchy awards for some women as well as the misogyny awards for men.
One step in the right direction would be if Michelle would stop acting like the “little woman”, a role she has assumed since the beginning of the campaign. She is an Ivy League Educated woman who is acting like June Cleaver. Hillary was so criticized for taking an active role during the Clinton administration, but it was it the end an important step, Hillary not stepping into the background like a well mannered servant.
Tokenism is not the answer. Obama was elected by a nation convinced that his victory means racism is over. But the ends never justify the means and the way this election was actually won is what concerns me. Putting women on the cabinet just to have women there is not the answer. The answer to to stop overlooking women who are more capable for whatever reason is convenient. The misogynistic overtones during the primaries and in the general election were obvious to all of us with a balanced outlook. The racism of the 1920′s was very similar. Everyone is so proud of themselves as if they are cutting edge populists. As a History teacher I cannot help but see parallels throughout American History. The revisionists keep re-examining history and the truth has a way of coming out. How this election was won was a shame. Bought and paid for, like so many in the past. Change? Okay, whatever. Taking Public Financing would have been Change.
I think we should be careful criticizing Michelle Obama for being “June Cleaver.” What are Ivy League educated women “supposed” to act like? Maybe she will want to be more involved and maybe she won’t but I don’t think we should poop on her, for lack of a better word, because she doesn’t fit some stereotype of how we think she is “supposed” to act. I want to focus on lifting up all women and not waiting around like a hawk for them to do something I don’t like so I can pounce
Just a thought 
I think Michelle Obama can and should be whatever kind of First Lady she wants to be. However, we should be careful to get the message out to our young girls that Mrs. Obama’s choice to fade into the background and take a subservient to her husband is a choice and not the only choice available to her. She has an opportunity to be a role model for our daughters, and we need them to have a variety of strong role models to choose from. I’m disappointed in her decision, but I respect that she has the right to make it. I still have the recipe for Mamie Eisenhower’s fudge, bless her heart.
Michelle has an opportunity, but she’s been an opportunist. Don’t forget that it was Michelle sitting on that land board who carved up a historical property she coveted to make it possible for Rezko, his wife and their backers to concoct a scam that enabled the Obamas to purchase that mansion.
Thank you, Cynthia. We need to support each other no matter our choice. One of the things that turns some women away from feminism is the feeling that their choice to stay home or to not work will be viewed as “less than”. People may be right about Michelle Obama – she may be selling out (I don’t really know) – but we have to be careful. Supporting all women means supporting some whose decisions wouldn’t necessarily be our own – as long as we’re not bashing each other.
Why is everyone so surprised about the cabinet positions that will be held by more of the same…men, formerly from the Clinton or Bush Administration… what do you expect, CHANGE? C’mon the ONLY leverage that American women, interested in this election, was to leave the table. We are 52% of the American population and women voted for the DNP without any demands and are now left with crumbs. People putting women on the cabinet, George, just for the sake of it, is the answer… remember the American revolution, you know taxation without representation… is bad. If we would acted like a true collective voice, we would have voted McCain then forced both parties to groom Democratic, etc. Partied women for the futures to come. Now, each party will try to out ethnic each other, for the sake of it, George, get it! While some women are ready for a US female president, majority in the senate and house, and the Supreme Court other women act like little pig-tailed girls not willing to support the cause and swoon like little girls (Obama girls that is). Let’s build this New Agenda to include pro-life and pro-choice women and get beyond 1973. Then we will be a forced to be reckon with. Otherwise, we will still be complaining in the next four years. Wake up, it’s time to support ALL women and not just wait for appointments!
I think the issue of Michelle Obama is a very sensitive one. Already, it seems from what I’ve read in the media and on blogs, that she’s been put in that rock and hard place women often find themselves: damned if we do, damned if we don’t. If she takes on a full-time Mom role, she gets bashed. If she speaks out, she gets bashed for being too angry, and the like. Obama is not even President yet and I think it remains to be seen just what sort of role his wife will play. And, should she remain in the background, isn’t part of being free to make the choices we choose to make, including parenting, part of any feminist agenda? If so, then all I can hope for is that Ms. Obama feels as free as possible to determine her path in the coming years.
George is right in that part of the reason Obama got elected was because of the systematic misogyny and the Anti-Feminist backlash that pervades our culture right now. And Michelle Obama is a good example of that push backward, to push women back into the kitchen where everyone will be happy and the world will not fall apart. Because you know Feminism makes women unhappy and the world fall apart; not the Patriarchy.
But criticizing any woman’s choices in oppression is not the answer.
Putting women in the cabinet “because they are women” is not entirely the answer. Putting women in the cabinet because there are women who can do it IS the answer. And if there are no women who can do it, which is not the case now, the answer would be to support and get women to the point where they can and then put them there. But it takes concerted effort to identify and put women there because they are women. In that way, yes this is the answer.
Because there are qualified women,and at times more qualified than the men, the fact that only a few women are appointed is evidence of discrimination.
40 years ago my Sociology professor told my Girls Catholic college class that a male black would be elected President before a female. The reason? Look to history. When male blacks were given equality ” the powers that were ” refused to include gender equality at the same time. In fact women still do not have equality under the U.S. Constitution. Equal
rights under law is priority number one.
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...