“Unlucky 16″ and other late day ruminations…
January 29, 2009
by Amy Siskind
|Back in the Fall, we explored the concept of “Unlucky 16″. The notion that women account for only 16% (or thereabouts) of so many leadership positions in government (16% Congress, 17% Senate), academia and corporate America. In fact, in 2008, women in corporate American make up just 15.4% of Fortune 500 corporate officer jobs (which is actually down from 16.4% in 2005). Despite the fact that women make up 52% of the population and 54% of the voters in the 2008 election, we seem unable to make progress at getting into leadership positions.
Well, President Obama’s meeting yesterday with 13 Corporate CEOs looks like more of the same. Of the 13 CEOs in attendance, only 2 of those invited were woman – or 15.4%. Does this seem like progress for the woman of this country? No way!
I might add the these same proportions of men/women are deciding the fate of women’s issues. So, it should come as no surprise that President Obama would cut $200 million which was meant to provide a safety net to cover the cost of women’s birth control, while more “important” items such as $70 million for a supercomputer at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and $75 million for smoking-cessation programs skate right by. Look who is making the decisions for our country. Still wonder why we need to promote more women in government?
On another front, the sleaze on Chris Matthew’s show continues. Thank you to our friend Rosa Clemente for forwarding us this “Exhibit A” of utter disrespect for a woman (see Anne Marie’s piece today titled Thoughts on Respect) :
Former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey tells Salon editor-in-chief Joan Walsh: “I am so damn glad that you can never be my wife.” Of course, what does Matthews do – well very little. When you work in a cesspool, you attract scum.
And finally, on a happier note, congratulations to our friend Beverly Neufeld at NYWA Government Affairs Commitee. The hard work of wonderful women’s coalition groups like NYWA helped push for the revival of the Fair Pay Act which was signed into law today by President Obama. A step forward for the women of this country, and we hope that Beverly will join us again on Ophelia to chat about next steps needed on achieving pay equity.
Skip to 1:00 for Bob Herbert’s condemnation of Armey’s comment:
Amy–glad you mentioned The Tweety Matthews. A friend’s husband was wondering why Matthews just sat there oblivious. Uh…maybe because he is?
Matthews never fails to disappoint.
The male guest was obnoxious. The female guest proved that women are just as capable of interrupting as men (early on in the interview). And, once again, it’s too bad that the woman did not speak out more assertively about how she was spoken to at the end of this clip. She did mumble a few words, but it was one of those opportunities to say: “EXCUSE ME?!* I’m tired of feeling like it’s someone else’s job to rescue women in these horrid interviews. Yes, they are subjected to disrespectful treatment and yes we should address it. But, damn, they need to stand up, shout out, stop the conversation, hold everything and draw attention to the matter. How powerful would that be?
Meanwhile, the cry for more women in government within the context of issues/policies sends a mixed message: Is it about gender parity or about issues? The Republicans are functioning as a pretty unified block right now. If someone can tell me how the Republican women in Congress have aligned themselves (with women’s issues or with their party) I’d be interested. Some of us at TNA are upset because of how willing Obama appeared to remove the funding for family planning while apparently keeping other line items in that we feel don’t even compare in importance. But, if there were women in Congress (and if there were, I would presume they would have been Republicans in this case on this issue) who were against the family planning money, then we’ve hit up against a contradiction.
Meanwhile, with January nearly over and TNA announcing domestic violence as one of their core issues to address in 2009, I’m wonder how we can be pro-active and not just re-active.
And, thank you Rosa for forwarding this clip. Thank you, Beverly, for all of your efforts on the fair pay act, which paid off today!
Mr. Armey was living up to his nickname.
Last comment on this video clip:
Imagine if every time a woman who is subjected to that kind of treatment, who at the moment she is in the limelight, is on national television, called the person out on their behavior. It would be so powerful. I wish every woman in those situations would halt the dialogue at that point and take issue with how they were spoken to. It would be a powerful thing and set a powerful example for other women watching.
Anybody remember?
“I’m very sorry to your husband; he might have a very difficult time with you.” – Rahmatullah Hashimi
PLEASE THANK HIM
Thanks to Bob Herbert for so forcefully pointing out the sexist comment by Dick Armey and demanding an apology.
Thanks Sheryl for posting that.
Please everyone, write to thank him at the New York Times. On the following link you will find a link to his email page:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/.....index.html
A couple of days ago fsteele made a great suggestion that we have a Male Feminist Hall of Fame (in response to Jared Polis’ post and letter to Obama). That is such a fantastic idea and I propose we recognize Bob herbert too.
It is so easy to complain, write emails/phone etc., when someone behaves badly (Chris Matthews, for example) yet we often forget to thank those who deserve the praise for such welcome support.
Sheryl,
I think what Matthews said about the “promises of Reagan” was right on target. Obama is showing to be more “Reaganesque” than being a real democrat. I know that this blog is not affiliated with any party, but I think that Obama’s Reagan worship explains a lot! The overwhelming corporate MSM support just for a start shows that they thought he would be their guy. He will spend like crazy pretending to be a democrat, and very little if any will ever reach the little people. He seems to have no problem giving to the banks/ wealthy, while cutting family planning for poor women. Sounds like Reagan to me!
Yes,
I remember. Wasn’t it one of the Taliban guys who made this statement to someone protesting Bush entertaining the Taliban leaders in TX, when he thought he could get their help with a pipe line?
Thank you, Lili, for the email link to thank Bob Herbert. I’ve written to thank him.
What Armey did was attempt to deny Ms Walsh her sexuality. This is ridiculous on many levels but especially because he is such an ugly old pig that the idea that any woman would want to be his wife is ridiculous. The idea that men grant female sexuality or that female sexuality is somehow derived from male sexuality is an issue women’s groups need to attack for our daughters sake. Women have allowed men to define sex and men have come up with pornography and told us that women do not respond to sex visually (which I guess is how they support the idea that women would find a man who looked like Armey marriage material). Men have defined female sexual fantasies as consisting of how we can best fit into male sexual fantasies. The part of female sexuality where we sit on our average sweat panted bums and check out hot men who are showing off for our approval is completely taboo in this culture and that needs to change. There is a lot of talk about how young women are allergic to calling themselves feminist. That is because media have convinced them that men will grant them their sexuality so they seek male approval. We have done nothing to challenge this and we have not offered young women a different compelling option. Women own their own sexuality, no man can grant it or take it away, You don’t need to have a lover or be sexually active at the moment to have sexuality it is just always there. It is more than OK to be visually stimulated by attractive men. You know we need to have a new womens mag (online to save money) called “Own it” featuring average looking women and great articles and also attractive men but no mention of fashion or product which is supposedly necessary to be sexual.
Loved that downside glance from Matthews after Herbert’s comment “What? What the … When did the rules change?”
Yes indeed. The rules have changed. It’s official. Thanks to Herbert for speaking out.
Palpable, visible daily evidence of TNAs effect. Or…the TNA effect.
I would be against a “feminist/male hall of fame”. It makes it cutesy, when what it is is human rights. Basic, and overdue.
Time we stopped fawning over men when they behave the way they should. Acknowledge it, thank them, but do it with dignity and the idea that it is due, and expected.
Sis,
The rules changed when all the women were knocked out of the running. They will change back when another one tries to run!
Anna,
Can you give us some examples of what Walsh could have said in reply?
Sis,
‘Male feminist hall of fame’ refers back to the Ms Magazine cover and to ‘Hall of Shame’. However it is too sweeping to be serious. It sounds like they have done great things for women all their life (like Bill Clinton, for instance) so it doesn’t quite fit someone who has just done a particular thing recently. Maybe it should be a “Real Male Feminist Award” and have a page for previous recipients of the award. Not a weekly or monthly award, but at irregular intervals when some man does something good.
Let’s see, recently there are Gov Paterson, Polis, Herbert….
I’m really opposed to tit-for-tat. I think it looks juvenile, and doesn’t fit with the TNA ‘brand’.
Just as we need to give strong negative feedback on sexist and misogynistic behaviors when we see them, we need to give POSITIVE FEEDBACK when we see respectful positive behaviors that we want to see more of.
From Lili (thank you Lili):
“PLEASE THANK HIM
Thanks to Bob Herbert for so forcefully pointing out the sexist comment by Dick Armey and demanding an apology. . . .
Please everyone, write to thank him at the New York Times.”
Action Plan:
1. Write a thank you email to Bob Herbert here: http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html
2. You can find out more about Bob Herbert here: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/...../oped/colu
Perhaps he can become a TNA ally. Maybe he could write a good OpEd piece for TNA on an issue –like RESPECT for women.
Update: the link in #1 of the Bob Herbert Action Plan above is incorrect. I should have just left it as Lili had it.
Here’s how to THANK Bob Herbert:
Go to: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/.....index.html then, next to the bottom of his picture, click on “Send and E-mail to Bob Herbert.” This will take you to the page where you can email him.
“I would be against a “feminist/male hall of fame”. It makes it cutesy, when what it is is human rights. Basic, and overdue.
Time we stopped fawning over men when they behave the way they should. Acknowledge it, thank them, but do it with dignity and the idea that it is due, and expected.”
I agree.
And I like how she stood up for herself in this video. It stands up for all women. That guy was really out of line. She didn’t let him say “give it a rest”. No one told him to “give it a rest”.
She asked him a question he didn’t know. And instead of just admitting he didn’t know the name of the income redistributionist, he looks at her incredulously, and then says he’s not going to get into it, and then he feels he has to retaliate against her with misogyny and sexism.
Herbert deserves kudos for critiquing a Republican sexist, sure, but he hasn’t stood up against Dem sexists, eg during either the Clinton or the Palin waves of misogyny, unless I missed something. It’s easy to stand up on your side of the fence.
To a large extent Ms Walsh’s treatment was no different than what was directed towards Hillary and Palin in the fall election by liberal Democrats and I didn’t see Walsh speaking out. Armey made himself look like a dope, not that that is enough to keep him off your TV, and he is too stupid to understand why he should apologize anyway he would only do it if he saw a benifit to himself. No one up on that Hardball screen is all good or all bad. Address the real problem. The culturally accepted idea that men can define sex and bestow female sexuality. That idea is what keeps some women, especially young women, seeking male approval instead of reaching their potential.
Great! Send kudos to men who behave in a non-sexist manner. But your outreach should be to women, IMHO. Two things must happen. Women need to stand up for themselves in their personal lives, and that means their men and their religious and community institutions. A women’s group can’t address personal sexist realities.
Second, nothing will change until organized women can deliver votes and money. Votes and money drive everything.
A plan for connection to the wider world, the world outside the blogosphere, if you will, in order to accomplish that is the only reason fro existence. We don’t need another think tank board writing proposals, we need to hit the grassroots election organization as hard as possible for 2010. I think this will be very difficult in a so called non-partisan group. Divisiveness is built in.
Well Puma I agree to an extent but women who stand up in their personal lives often bear the brunt of the Patriarchy with -no- support, only ridicule, even by so-called Feminist groups, sometimes. They get fired, beaten, humiliated, or mocked at the least. They’re only recourse, if for instance, getting fired for being a problem, is going to court, and then sometimes it is not ever resolved, leaving this individual unemployable.
I don’t think it is responsible to tell women that they need to stand up for themselves to achieve Feminist goals. We need to join groups.
It’s nice when they do, but we need Feminist groups to stand behind them, otherwise the torrents of women-blaming ensue and the misogyny machine starts rolling.
Thanks ER – you must have dogs? People with well behaved dog companions will have observed that positive feedback works way better than negative feedback. Not that I am comparing men to dogs…..just sayin’!
The difficulty in getting a women’s group to back someone up is that most of the time the women’s groups can’t agree on the issues they’re going to support. Right wingers and religious groups are worlds apart from leftist groups and secularists. I think I know where the so-called Left stands on women’s issues, but not the right, other than equal pay and no misogyny or sexism.
I’d like to see what a platform for women’s rights would look like and I’d like to see the practical steps enumerated to achieve those goals.
I know women face hurdles and even dangers when speaking out about sexism etc., often those dangers come from other women who are also afraid to show support and back the men, to wit “feminist” for Obama. Still, there will be no progress unless individual women are willing to take even tiny risks and steps toward their liberation from the institutions that oppress them.
Kiuku
“She asked him a question he didn’t know. And instead of just admitting he didn’t know the name of the income redistributionist, he looks at her incredulously, and then says he’s not going to get into it, and then he feels he has to retaliate against her with misogyny and sexism.”
I’m not usually one for trying to get inside the other person’s head, but on this point, your mini-analysis rings true, at least for me.
Sis
Good to see you back on the blog! And, I agree, no need for a male Hall of Fame. It seems enough to acknowledge and thank men when they do the right thing, but I tire of men being showered with praise when, as you point out, they simply did the right thing. It’s like when a man is a single parent and people gush over how he juggles so many things and, oh, how touching and what a wonderful Dad, when women do the same thing every day and as far as that sort of gushing – not so much.
fsteele
As to what she could have said in response, a number of things come to mind (lines I employ quite often in my life when situations warrant):
“Excuse me?” (Then wait to see if the person reitterates it, which quite often they don’t cause then it’s all silent and they’re starting to feel embarrassed…)
“Please don’t speak to me in that manner.”
“Your last comment is utterly unacceptable and unprofessional.”
“I thank you, in advance, for your apology for the last comment you just made.”
“You’re speaking on national television to a professional adult in a manner that is demeaning, ridiculing and wholeheartedly unappreciated and rejected.”
“Your comment is patronizing to me personally and as a woman. Let’s keep the discourse on topic and on point.”
(I have a lot more where those came from….)
ER and Lili
Thanks to you both about the heads up re: link to say thank you.
pumabear – Great post.
fsteele – Maybe you could put the link that Lili and ER posted on PUMAResponsers.
Thanks, Anna. Has anyone formed a committee for a legislative or social/economic TNA platform? If more women, corporate and working class, knew what real world issues you’re fighting for more would link up. I guess I’m talking about a pro-active rather than a reactive platform.
Well, whether presented lightly or seriously, i see two worthwhile messages worth sending to the public:
1. Yes, men can be feminists, unlike Obama, and here are some examples.
2. This man did a good thing now.
‘Men can be feminists’ is defense for us against the Ms-cover related spin that we object to a man per se on their cover. This is why the term ‘male feminist’ would be good to work in somewhere.
Yes, too light a presentation might make set the recipient up for ridicule. So ‘hall of fame’ is probably not a good term; also it opens up discussion about the man’s overall record instead of focusing on his current good action.
As for how the woman can counter such remarks when they happen ….
“She asked him a question he didn’t know. And instead of just admitting he didn’t know the name of the income redistributionist, he looks at her incredulously, and then says he’s not going to get into it, and then he feels he has to retaliate against her with misogyny and sexism.”
Suppose she brushes off her shoulder while continuing to press her point: “So you don’t know the name, therefore /////”
or
“Well, the name is //// and his record shows ///”
OK – I agree that a Hall of Fame acknowledgement should be reserved for a lifetime of good behavior! Having grown up in Europe and paying little attention to sports in the US, the significance was lost on me. Let’s continue, though, to thank those men who support women even though we may expect it and think it is overdue.
Sent a Thank You message to Mr. Herbert. Lili and ER, thanks for making it easy to do.
Saying it was an outstanding comment was the appropriate way to address a comment like that. Outstanding in this case does not imply sarcasm, but that it was an outstanding comment, as in an inappropriate comment to an offensive degree. Also saying stop telling me to give it a rest was sufficient to call that out as well. I think she stood up for herself fine. The ball is in our court and the men’s.
Thanks to Anna and Lili for saying thank you.
Lili, I don’t have dogs, but I do have children. I know that if we give positive feedback to behaviors we like (even if they aren’t perfect), we will see those good behaviors again.
Was the ‘fair paycheck act’ actually signed today? I’ve heard the ‘Ledbetter Act’ was signed, but the ‘fair paycheck act’ was taken out by the Senate. The Confluence has some analysis:
“Ledbetter Act without the Paycheck Fairness Act = A nice car without wheels”
http://riverdaughter.wordpress.....ut-wheels/
Kiuku – I agree that saying “stop telling me to give it a rest” was a fine response. My comments are more to how she responded to Armey’s remark to her about being glad she could never be his wife. She muttered something about feeling similarly towards him, which just made her appear thrown and which kept the discourse on a horrible level by engaging at that level. It is at THAT juncture that I wish she would have said “stop the presses!!!!’ and addressed it. One can do it. I think Mr. Herbert is an excellent example of how one can take control and shift the focus when it is called for. I know it’s harder to do in the moment when you are the subject of the treatment and it’s easy for others to say what a person could have done after the fact. But, all of that said, it’s a habit and I think women need to practice speaking up, speaking out, and speaking loud when such comments are made. And, yes, of course, all the rest of us need to speak out about it, as well. But there’s nothing like that moment on national television to call attention to it.
Anna,
I suspect that the men know exactly what they’re doing when they say things like Armey’s ‘wife’ remark. He was asked a relevant question that he could not answer. His ‘wife’ remark served to change the subject, to divert attention from his ignorance.
fsteele – Can never know what another’s thoughts or motives are, but I agree the speculation you assert, as was put forth by Kiuku up thread as well, seems like a reasonable hypothesis. But my point is that just as Armey changed the subject, Walsh could have changed it as well by calling him out on his sexist and inappropriate comment. She didn’t and that’s regretable. That’s all.
Anna,
But that also changes the subject from what Walsh was trying to talk about — ie income redistribution. Either or both changes take the conversation away from the on-topic issue.
Suzette Elgin(sp?) wrote some very good books about this kind of manipulation, though I’ve forgotten the titles. Here’s a partial list of her books, on many topics.
http://ozarque.livejournal.com/profile
Deborah Tannen’s TALKING NINE TO FIVE, and its sequel, have similar material: men’s strategic use of such ploys.
Did anyone take note that in Iraq they are having elections and women are running for office because there is a 25% quota on women in office? Did I get that right? Maybe we should follow their precedent.
Also, we can put pressure on politicians all we want but it isn’t going to change unless people who support women (a lot of men included) start boycotts etc. We have the power to make an impact if we unite. Heaven forbid women stop spending money, then we’ll really see how bad the economy can get.
Loralee – I agree that en masse organized boycotts/actions can be powerful beyond words, literally. Think of the impact in the south when blacks refused to ride the bus, walking miles and miles to work instead. The impact of that statement was enormous. Bottom line is so often the almighty dollar.
Loralee,
I agree women are in a great position to boycott the products of certain advertisers. There was a lot of talk about that during the primaries, but it didn’t seem to have much lasting effect. Maybe it needs to be more massive and simpler.
Boycotting GE by not buying their refrigerators won’t work, because people make major purchase decisions on more selfish grounds. And they might just postpone their refrigerator purchase for a week.
Boycotting Ben and Jerry’s ice cream for a week might work, if we’re buying other brands of ice cream instead, so it’s a loss that won’t be made up later. Boycotting them forever might just appear as some other company offering better flavors.
Switching to a brand that advertises what you’re advocating (such as Beauty without Cruelty cosmetics or Seventh Generation or Green Forests paper towels, seems more promising).
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...