The New Agenda Blog

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda.

In a word: fear. Suzi Parker of the Washington Post agrees and in her latest piece, notes that Limbaugh took an opportunity Thursday to belittle Secretary of State Clinton, for no reason in particular. Limbaugh must be terrified of Hillary, and her ever growing popularity. The recent Tumblr posts showing her off as the epitome of badass cool, her national popularity polling in the high sixties, and big media’s ‘Hillary as 2016 nominee’ buzz all compel him to stomp on her once again. This even though he has on occasion made it clear he thinks she is tough, capable and a patriot – but surely not one he would ever want to see elected president.

Kirsten Powers, Karen Tumulty, Peggy Noonan and a number of others have commented that the war on women is waged at women of both sides by both sides. No honest person could say otherwise. When Limbaugh complains that only conservative women are the target of sexism, in the next breath insulting the most powerful woman in the world by indicating she has accomplished nothing during her tenure, stating “all she is is a secretary,” he defeats his own argument. And, of course, he took the opportunity to objectify Secretary Clinton physically, focusing on her need for body shaping Spanx and her “cankles,” or as he dubbed the combo platter, “Spankles.” Mature. (more…)

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda.

Junior year of high school first exposed me to PETA. A classmate handed out green leaflets with pictures of animals getting abused. I didn’t know how to understand those images and looked away. It was only until summer after senior year of college that I decided to ‘go vegan’, and PETA had nothing to do with it. In fact, they were working against me.

The PETA acronym stands for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Very simply put, they’re an animal rights organization—and who doesn’t like animals? Unfortunately, PETA moves beyond animal welfare and uses confrontational and forceful tactics to sway people into their cause. PETA has disrespected and sexualized women through advertisements in the past. In their mission statement, PETA defends this strategy by saying they “must rely largely on free advertising” and dismisses misogynistic criticisms and the disturbances of shock value because “it is sometimes necessary to shake people up.” These responses are fairly weak, especially in comparison to the messages their advertising promotes. PETA’s style of advertising causes their intended message to get lost while continuing to send other messages to society. (more…)

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda.

I realize I should probably get out a thesaurus and find a more eloquent way to say this, but National Girlfriends Networking Day is coming up, and I am so excited I can hardly stand it.

After owning a small business, I reinvented myself in my early thirties, going back to school to become an elementary teacher. The district I worked for assigned mentors to all fresh hires, and veteran teachers graciously sought out us “newbies” to check in with regularly and fill in some gaps when our mentors weren’t able to. Now in my forties, I have once again begun a transformation. I took some time to discover what I’m truly passionate about, I have some great ideas, and I’m cautiously taking some baby steps. But where I’m headed is brand new territory, and it is up to me to seek out other smart women to help guide me along.

For me, the pressure of putting on a suit and attending a semiformal meet and greet at the local convention center is a little intimidating. During the years I worked for myself I attended a few of these events. We all know them well: you show up to find information booths, maybe some product samples or certificates for discounts. You have a few seconds to dazzle someone who is equally nervous about dazzling you. You exchange information with a few other business owners, promise to consider calling them in the future, and leave with the understanding that you were all strangers when you walked in and remained so as you left. They work well for some people, but I always wound up with a pile of business cards, but no real connections, and no real value added to my own business. (more…)

You can hear Amy Siskind’s interview about the War on Women here. The Huffington Post piece referred to in her interview is below.

The Spring of Sexism

You can thank Rush Limbaugh for the sexism revolution this spring.

His diatribe last week was the watershed. Insipid slurs meant to diminish and demean a Georgetown Law student for this offense: being a woman. More loathsome drivel on the airwaves — a veritable war of words waged against women in our country. Yet, were his words novel or unique? Absolutely not!

Poor Rush (well, not really) and his inopportune timing. He was just being his outrageous, obtuse self; oblivious to the fault lines created by a series of cataclysmic events for women. Congressman Issa’s all-male panel discussing women’s reproductive rights, which, the next day was analyzed and sanctimoniously criticized for excluding women by — you guessed it — an all-male panel on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. We got to ponder whether aspirin between the knees was an effective form of birth control, before observing the three-ringed circus in Virginia, where, as the legislature mulled ultrasound probes, Del. Albo bemoaned that the discussions were hurting his sex life. (more…)

Much has been made of the “war on women” in the last couple months following Congressional talks about federal insurance mandates for birth control. Comments from national and local talk radio hosts, political pundits, and so called comedians  disparaging women across the political spectrum have come under scrutiny providing further ammunition in this “war”. Such comments have led politicians on both sides of the aisle to seek donations off of these comments.  Congresswoman Pelosi and Democratic strategists James Carville and Donna Brazille have sent out fundraising emails referencing this “war on women”. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has also sent out an email to raise funds off of Hilary Rosen’s comments about his wife’s choice to stay at home. In many ways, this “war on women” has simply become political theater by people on both sides of the aisle. It makes me think, if this is a war on women, why do I feel like I’m the grenade? In the battle of rhetorical contrast, women have become the weapon used to score political points. (more…)

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda.

In the name of carrying the political water for the Democratic Party, media strategist Hilary Rosen’s interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper created a mini-firestorm as she attempted to paint Republican candidate Mitt Romney as out of touch with women by painting his wife, Ann Romney as out of touch, too.  Here are her remarks as recorded by The Washington Free Beacon:

ANDERSON COOPER: To the Romney campaign’s point, they say they’re focusing on the economy, and that’s what women say they overwhelmingly care about right now in poll after poll. And whether it’s a typical pattern or not, women are seeing jobs come back much more slowly than men are. Is there anything really wrong then, on reaching out to women on an issue that they care about, on the economy?

HILARY ROSEN: Well, first, can we just get rid of this word, “war on women”? The Obama campaign does not use it, President Obama does not use it—this is something that the Republicans are accusing people of using, but they’re actually the ones spreading it. With respect to economic issues, I think actually that Mitt Romney’s right, that ultimately, women care more about the economic well-being of their families and the like. But he doesn’t connect on that issue either. What you have is Mitt Romney running around the country saying, “Well, my wife tells me what women really care about are economic issues.” And, “When I listen to my wife, that’s what I’m hearing.” Guess what? His wife has never actually worked a day in her life. She’s never really dealt with the economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing—in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school, and how do—why we worry about their future. So I think it’s, yes, it’s about these positions, and yes there will be a war of words about the positions, but there’s something much more fundamental about Mitt Romney—he just seems so old-fashioned when it comes to women, and I think that comes across, and I think that’s going to hurt him over the long term. He just doesn’t really see us as equal. (more…)

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda. Cross posted with permission from RabbleRouserRuminations and Katz Porch.

In case you don’t know to what Ms. Judd is referring, let me fill you in. Recently, there has been a big brouhaha over – wait for it – her face. Yes, her face, and what some folks have decided was puffy. They came up with all kinds of reasons as to WHY this was the case. I’ll save you the suspense – they think it was from plastic surgery. (Photo credit: entertainment.blogs.foxnews.com)

According to Ms. Judd’s piece in The Daily Beast, she does not usually pay attention to this kind of thing at all, but was encouraged to do so by those who are close to her. So, Ms. Judd has weighed in on this “crucial” issue, and oh, my, did she ever spell it out:

The Conversation about women’s bodies exists largely outside of us, while it is also directed at (and marketed to) us, and used to define and control us. The Conversation about women happens everywhere, publicly and privately. We are described and detailed, our faces and bodies analyzed and picked apart, our worth ascertained and ascribed based on the reduction of personhood to simple physical objectification. Our voices, our personhood, our potential, and our accomplishments are regularly minimized and muted.

[...]However, the recent speculation and accusations in March feels different, and my colleagues and friends encouraged me to know what was being said. Consequently, I choose to address it because the conversation was pointedly nasty, gendered, and misogynistic and embodies what all girls and women in our culture, to a greater or lesser degree, endure every day, in ways both outrageous and subtle. The assault on our body image, the hypersexualization of girls and women and subsequent degradation of our sexuality as we walk through the decades, and the general incessant objectification is what this conversation allegedly about my face is really about.

Indeed. This “hypersexualization” is evident almost every day when we see little girls wearing shorts with slogans across the back of them, or being made up to look older than they are. It was just such actions that led the humorist, Celia Rivenbark, to pen her essay (and book title), “Stop Dressing Your Six Year Old Like A Skank.” It is pervasive, and insidious, this assault on our image. And even though we know it, are aware of it, have written about it, have made documentaries about it (like, “Killing Us Softly” in 1979, and its sequels), it continues. (more…)

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda.

I was shocked when a friend posted Kyle Spencer’s NY Times article about an increase in the number of fathers’ involved in PTAs.  Greater male parent involvement is a good thing; I believe all parents should be involved in their children’s education – regardless of gender.  However – I was shocked at the inference that “fathers” have professionalized PTAs – or that their professionalization is a recent shift.

Back in 2007 the same newspaper took a very different viewpoint – at that time it implied that parents were becoming too involved and that PTAs might be overreaching and overstepping their bounds.  While they were careful to use the term “parents” – all the individuals mentioned were women.   Is the NYT changing its opinion – or is it now OK for PTAs to be active because they are now led by men?

I have lived in on 3 continents and I can tell you that American schools are strong because they have active parent involvement.  Does that put pressure on administrators – absolutely.  Do they always like it – no.   Is that a bad thing?  I say for the most part no.   I am sure there are exceptions out there – but the PTAs I have seen create a vibrant school community, as well as provide and fund services that many schools cannot support otherwise (e.g. PE teachers, music programs, funding for new facilities).      These parents, regardless of gender, give countless hours – I know – I have seen them and they work tirelessly.  They motivate countless volunteers and raise much needed funds for their schools and districts. (more…)