Current Article

Desperate for a New Movement

By pm317 on July 13, 2009 at 3:01 PM in Current Affairs

Feminism as a word to describe a movement has outlived its usefulness. As a political movement it has been co-opted, subverted, misinterpreted, and even sabotaged. Instead of fighting a losing battle of reinstating it to its initial glory, how can we adapt to the changing times? I feel that there is a need for a new conversation, a new movement while still being true to the underlying philosophy of equality of men and women in all spheres of life.

The danger that lurks around the corner is with the mindset of the “post-feminist” (their phrase and their sentiment) younger generation of women. If you think I am off course with that observation prove me wrong.

Some women of the younger generation do not seem to get it as they are busy ingratiating themselves to the “DailyKos” crowd. They have simplified their existence to be with the big guns but not as equal players. They have declared “Mission Accomplished” with their delusion of post-feminism. They are enabled in their delusion by the female media ~~gasbags~~ personalities who are simply ecstatic to be in the midst of their more powerful male cohorts and to act as their cheerleaders. They mistakenly think they have arrived. No, they have not.

They may no longer be on the sidelines but they are not the main power players either — they are fielders to use a cricket analogy (or ballgirls like in tennis). Many of them can’t even get their journalistic act together. How many of this set of younger generation of women are budding CEOs, early entrepreneurs, up and coming political leaders, or emerging experts in their respective professions? They are not serious enough to alter the dynamics of power play and start a truly “post-feminist” movement while they are busy selling themselves short to the likes of DailyKos crowd.

There is an ongoing conversation at the Reclusive Leftist about what feminism as a philosophy and as a political movement means. In one comment that reflects my own sentiments, Violet notes “Look at this conversation. I wrote a post about feminist bloggers and why some of the young twits are pruning their feminism into whatever is deemed suitable at DailyKos. And instead of talking about that, the whole thread has turned into whether women want to call themselves pro-life or pro-choice or pro-life-choice or what particular label.”

So how should the conversation change? What new terms and phraseology and new attitudes will we use? How do we tell the ~~ballgirls~~ younger generation of women, we are not there yet, to not count their chicken before they hatch?

I don’t have an answer but would like to start off the conversation using Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s answer to a question from the NYT interview.

Q: Is that another example of how you’ve worked with men over the years?

JUSTICE GINSBURG: I always thought that there was nothing an antifeminist would want more than to have women only in women’s organizations, in their own little corner empathizing with each other and not touching a man’s world. If you’re going to change things, you have to be with the people who hold the levers.

What Justice Ginsberg says resonates with me completely. I was never much of a women’s organization type of person. I was a member of Society for Women Engineers (SWE) at one time and even wore the T-shirt (that had 10 things women engineers do differently, a play on words using traditional woman’s chores). I also chose a profession where there are few women and incidentally have my share of bruises in the battle for equality and fair play. I agree with Justice Ginsberg that to effect change, we have to insert ourselves where we are least expected.

Not like the “young twits” making themselves suitable for DailyKos crowd but as equals, confident and hungry for power and success, ready to play in the big leagues like we mean it.

One courageous woman did do that in the last year but the “young twits” were too busy in their fawning of their male cohorts to recognize that.

Perhaps a good starting point to change the status quo is to be self-aware and cultivate a good dose of reality for where we are today. While we are at it, we might as well discard the labels that pigeonhole us into in-fighting and self-destruction — feminists vs non-feminists or better yet post-feminists, pro-life vs pro-choice, and so on.

I will end this post with this picture*. Beautiful and innocent faces — I kind of smile every time I see that picture. The joy on their faces is palpable — innocence is bliss. Adorable little girls, everywhere — what will their future look like? Will their potential be realized to the fullest extent? What opportunities will they get in life? Where will they be in 20 years?

* The picture comes from an ad for a charity organization called the SOS Children’s Villages.

jbjd

How about calling ourselves “equalists”? (Treating people equally does not mean, treating them the same.)

lorac

My concern about this is that it may inadvertently dilute the push for women’s rights. It seems that departments of women’s studies, as well as organizations such as NOW, have become no different than social work, and have pushed for the rights of all – hence, in a way they are already “equalists”.

Social work and women’s studies now seem no different – both now talk about the intersection of culture, gender, class, sexuality, etc. Which is certainly noble, important, and necessary work. But nobody seems to work anymore on the shared needs of women in general – everything has become very fragmented, and I think, less powerful.

So I’m wondering if equalist may turn into a movement for everybody, and thereby lose the focus on women, as I feel women’s studies and NOW did…

pm317

dilute the push for women’s rights

As with any minority, there is good and bad with adhering to your group’s identity and the fear that we may give up something if we walk away from our identity is also real. The delicate balance is to use the identity when it is advantageous but mitigate its negative effects when it hurts you. As individuals and as groups we have to strike that balance.

elise

pm317, I believe I heard Obama say several times in the course of his campaign, “This is our time” or words to that effect. I never quite understood to which group he was referring, but I’m sure he won’t mind if I plagiarize since he has done so often himself.

This is our time. Last year, the Dahlia Lama said, was the year of the woman and even if the result of the election would seem to indicate he was mistaken, I believe there is still a chance he was right. The electricity was there in Hillary’s campaign and since Sept,2008 there has been a measurable resurgence of feminine pride. The GE and maltreatment of Sarah Palin, has effectively brought many women on opposite philosophical sides closer together.

Will putting a new label on old inequality bring about change? Feminist, word and movement, has been under assault for years and IMO we need to take it back from those who would undermine and those who weaken it. The underlying meaning and purpose still survives for those of us who gave it our hearts. It has become our “N” word and we need to embrace it.

http://www.hillaryorbust.com Hillary or Bust

I think the number one issue hurting women today is the oversexualization of women, and now younger and younger girls, in the media.

Equal access or equal pay doesn’t mean crap when men don’t respect women and women don’t respect themselves because of the cultural porn that’s being put out there.

If young women are acting like “twits” it’s because they are too focused on fashion and trying to look pretty, because they’ve been brainwashed to do so. Can’t pro-choice and pro-life women band together to fight this nonsense?

elise

Amen to that, HoB. Why are young women willing to be degraded and reduced to a piece of meat? Why do the role models have to be drug or alcohol addicted, irresponsible party girls and receive endless media attention for their bad behavior?

Last year, when I still watched MSNBC, I recall Olberman saying he was reporting on Brittney, Paris, Anna Nichole, Lindsay Lohan et al because his producers forced him to, yet he gave nightly updates and relished the coverage.

There has to be a way to engage younger women and get control of the message again. The movement began with young women and was apart from the Civil Rights issue because, even then, we knew we were excluded and left on our own to fight for our rights.

Arabella Trefoil

Thank you for this important post. I agree with you completely. Just wait until this young women decide to have babies. Then they’ll wise up.

Feminism is not dead and has never been dead. The rich vein of feminist ore is temporarily underground.

For “ore” feel free to substitute “ire” or “molten lava” as you prefer.

trixta

Feminism is not dead and has never been dead. The rich vein of feminist ore is temporarily underground.

My sentiments exactly. The term has a rich history and needn’t be jettisoned just because it’s been hijacked by a political party. Definitions are ALWAYS a point of contention, so I say let’s keep the term “feminism” and fight to redefine it for ourselves and times. Terms and their definitions are what you make of them, so substituting feminism for some other term would not prevent that term being hijacked as well.

Ellen D

TWO courageous women did that and a third is being grilled today about joining an Old Boys Club.

I also went into a male profession.

I work with my daughter who is now beginning her own business – in a male profession. I think she thought my advice was outdated – that those battles had been won – until she started encountering personally what I had been talking about.

Now she sees that nothing has changed and in a lot of ways it has become worse.

Arabella Trefoil

As soon a a young woman faces gender barriers, she changes her mind.

The younger generation no longer faces the educational barriers women my age face. They (as college students) annot conceive of discrimination based on gender.

Too soon old, too late smart.

pm317

Wow, an interesting observation about the absence of educational barriers for the younger generation. Do we have to wait then to see how they will use the fruits of such education opportunities? If the last election is any sign of their maturity, it is disappointing. May be this is the transition generation. However, do you all remember the Yale study from 2005 — how many of the IVY League graduates wanted to stay home?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/20/national/20women.html (original)
http://www.slate.com/id/2126636/ (challenge on its methodology)
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/23/national/23women-sidebar.html (authors rebuttal)

Indra Nooyi, Pepsico’s CEO was asked why there were so few women CEOs? Her reply was that the most hardwork that prepares and gives you visibility to become a CEO has to be done in the child bearing age, 30-40. She thought that the progress we have made will enable some in the current generation to make enough sacrifices (with family life and such)that the numbers will go up in another 10-20 years. May be, but if we treat the last election as a bellwether we may be in for a big disappointment.
Shainzona

I became a feminist after years of trying to play the game the way the boys wanted (I was successful) and then looking back and being repulsed at who I had become because of what I had to do just to get along.

I vowed then that my daughter would never have to have the same thoughts once she arrived at her spot in life.

(She earned her PhD last Friday, by the way!)

Woman must never have to play any games to gain their equal place in society.

I, too, am looking for a new way forward for true women’s equality. It’s sad to see the work I put into it these past 30 years mean so little to young women today.

pm317

Congratulations! (to you and your daughter). Higher education certainly gives you the opportunity to make your mark.

elise

pm317, in 2005, Larry Summers currently an economic adviser to Obama and from 2001-2006 president of Harvard, suggested that “women’s under-representation in the top levels of academia is due to a “different availability of aptitude at the high end.”

The reference was specifically to math and science and the implication is very damaging to women. It wasn’t social or environmental, but a gender deficiency.

I received my BS in math in 1978 and looked for a sponsor among my professors for a PHD program. One told me straight out math wasn’t a discipline for women. He was a ass and so is Summers. During Summers term as president of Harvard, tenure was granted to fewer women than at any time since the University opened admittance to women as professors. He was forced to resign and then given a position in Obama’s campaign and the White House.

Reliable studies have shown there is no difference in aptitude in high school students, but there is no better way to discourage women away from the sciences than to assert abstract ideas are beyond their capabilities.

pm317

You’re right. Higher ed offers no guarantee and there will still be problems. I have my own story to vouch for it. And what they did about science and math is biting their asses now because of not enough SMT graduates.

candy

Interesting to see the two comments following this. Can’t it be said then that Sarah Palin set a great example? She wasn’t a ball girl like the Kos young twits who mock her. She played as equal in the big league in Alaska politics, fought her way into the governor’ seat in her 30s to 40s (and debunked the liberal feminists constant whining about not being able to have it all by having 5 kids while she was at it.) Once she because the CEO of the state she dictated the rules and decided how she will do her job as a working mom. Her office was set up to enable her to be mom and governor at the same time. She didn’t play by the boys rules. She hit the top and set her own rule.

But we learned that the twits don’t like women who don’t play by the boys rules. It was apparently criminal for Gov. Palin to travel home on LEGAL state per diems so that she can have a more normal family live with her kids. Them twits apparently believe that to be a true feminist Palin should have played by the men’s rules…ie absolutely no family friendly workplaces allowed.

The world has turned totally upside down with these young twits kissing the Kos’ frat boys asses while accusing Sarah Palin of pretending to be a woman, calling her the worst thing ever happened to women. Palin can chew these twits up and spit them out if they ever have to go woman-o-woman against her.

Doc99

David Schuster interviews Kristinn Taylor over the FreeRepublic Malia thread. Taylor reminds Schuster about the treatment of the Palin family. The look on Schuster’s face says it all.

Doc99

From Christian Science Monitor: Palin Bashing is Woman Bashing.

Docelder

Palin Bashing is Woman Bashing

Even that much can not be said in mixed company so long as Palin represents conservatism and American traditional values. I think some sexism is there, but Ronald Reagan today would be attacked just the same as Palin. Palin parallels Reagan a great deal. I think we were fortunate to have had Reagan in his time, and further blessed that he did not attend Harvard. We didn’t need an intellectual at the time, we needed a positive leader who believed in America… who believed in us. What goes around comes around as we find ourselves right back in that same place again.

Peggy Sue

I heard Greta Van Sustern say the same thing not only on Palin but Hillary Clinton. She was talking to one of the Fox talking heads [male, can't remember his name] by phone and mentioned that Hillary’s treatment by Republicans and Dems was clearly sexist and was now being repeated by the Dems against Sarah Palin. And that many men don’t “get it.”

She proved the point by this commentator’s reaction, which was a quick dismissal and going on to something else.

But it really is the reaction and the participation of women in particular that disturbs me. Young women pretend that they’ll always be young and bias in the workplace and/or educational opportunities was something that affected their mothers, but is a given these days. I can make excuses for the young–they don’t believe it until they’ve seen it and even when they do they laugh it off as a joke.

But there’s no excuse for older women, who remember the struggle, who watched their own mothers and grandmothers struggle under the thumb of a society that laughed at a woman’s aspirations, who convinced many that they had nothing to contribute beyond dinner on the table by 6 p.m.

The language and attacks I’m hearing now remind me of what things were like when I was a young working woman–how management reacted [asking if you were using birth control was considered perfectly okay] or doctors automatically deciding that every complaint was about “not having a baby.” And school guidance counselors would only direct a female student to “socially acceptable” careers [nursing or teaching]. And how fast you “typed” was a critical skill. Too bad for me.

It’s depressing to think that we’re losing ground because of apathy. But maybe each generation needs to fight these old battles. Here’s hoping the young women today don’t wait too long. Because the battle going forward will theirs to lose.

Ani

I think this generation will have to fight its own battle. The problem with being 20 is you think: you know everything, you’re invincible and you’ve got forever. It goes by in the blink of an eye.

And for all the commenters who noted that young women don’t get it until the are on the receiving end of sexism, that is correct.

lorac

But still, I think something must have changed. I became interested in women’s issues at age 10 (my dad used to call me a “women’s libber”), so the only experience I had with sexism was that my chore was helping to wash the dishes daily and my brother only had to take the trash out to the curb once a week (and yes, I complained about the unfairness!).

It just seems like, back then, there had emerged a kind of joy and strength in identifying with other women, whereas today’s younger women seem to have gone back somewhat to being male-identified (taking their self-worth from approval from men).

I’m certain that even though they are young, they must still have “opportunities” to see sexism directed at themselves. It may not be as much as they will face later, but I think it’s still there. Seems like a big part of the problem is their reaction to that sexism, not that it doesn’t exist at all…..?

Peggy Sue

When things come easily, it’s easy to take rights, freedoms, access for granted. I think the argument could be made on many fronts these days.

It’s a warning to everyone: wake up. Before it’s too late.
Ani

As someone pointed out above, since educational opportunities are better for women now, a lot of young women truly don’t get it — that comes in the work force later and trying to raise a family.

We have definitely had a backslide toward the “Barbie generation” if you look at girls’ mode of dress –ie, being covered by two postage stamps. This is rewarded. The tabloid culture, reality tv, the bachelorette — glamorizing being a “ho” in other words. There really is no other way to put it.

http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

I like the term – equalists – because it describes the main intent of women in America since the suffragettes.

But as many of my generation of women found out – the men aren’t necessarily going to turn down the vitriol OR the requirements to do certain jobs. There is no Affirmative Action mandate to make the job or the treatment easier for a woman.

Women have to stop whining about mistreatment and stand up for their worth. There a two examples: One in the political world: Hillary Clinton and one in the pragmatic world: Erin Brockovich. There is even one in the world of publishing: JK Rowling

Had any of those women* (Oh God, *ladies is such a forbidden word by the angry sisters) waited for approval or acquiescence from men there would have been no moving forward for them.

Women have to be their own best promoter without the victim mentality kicking the door open first.

Ellen D

Hi Buzz. I don’t think a number of women are whining, I think they are becoming more vocal. And that’s OK – that is part of fighting back.
Hillary is a fighter but even she recognized the glass ceiling.
The enormous talent of Erin Brockovich and JK Rowling were dependent on males in a position to recognize and use that talent.
I agree that women have to be their own best promoter but even JK Rowling felt she had to hide her gender behind her initials.
I hate the victim mentality as much as you – for one thing I think it holds women back – but sometimes it seems that more vitriol is aimed at strong women than the male counterpart standing beside her.

http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

Buuuuttttt…they ALSO moved beyond and out from behind any male shields by their hard work, their tenacity, and their own intelligence.

I hardly think JK Rowling using her initials shows fear or that Brockovich waited for some man to pat her on the head to use her initiative.

Certainly, you cannot believe that Hillary stifled her own ambition to only follow Bill and crumbled into the “it’s unfair” mentality that so many women take on as a mantra.

Please, do not misread my words. Women must hold their own despite the system.

Each time a woman comes out and complains or plays the victim card, isn’t that the same as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton playing the race card?

Move beyond victimhood and victim messages. Be on top of the game you want to play alongside being a woman.

Did Hillary even utter a word that somehow she was a victim? No.

oowawa

Good article, pm317. I am amused by the coining of new terms using the antecedent “post,” as in “post-feminism,” or, to mention a couple of other formulations, “post-modernism” and “post-rock.” In all of these expressions, the term “post” suggests a supercilious and condescending presumption: “we’re beyond that now,” or, “that is so yesterday.” Hip and trendy, these expressions say more about the dismissive attitudes of their users than anything descriptive about any new phenomenon. I feel so post-snark in dealing with this subject.

pm317

Exactly. In this case their use of that term is also a rationalization, a cover for blatantly rejecting a well qualified woman (any woman but not this woman syndrome).
Peggy Sue

Well, it feeds into the “post-racial” message that was heralded from the rooftops. Elect a black man and all racial problems will fall away.

It’s never that easy. We have made strides in racism and sexism. But we ain’t there yet.

Unless you live in lala land.

lorac

I think Obama’s use of “post-racial”, though, was to assauge white voters, to assure them that he wasn’t going to push his “blackness” on them. I don’t think he was actually trying to say that everything is okay now (although I actually don’t think he particularly cares – I don’t think he’s really that into civil rights, for anyone).

o

http://tammybruce.com/2009/07/palin-hints-at-independent-conservative-movement.html

In an interview with the Washington Times, Palin makes her most direct comments yet about Conservativism versus the Republican Party. In my humble opinion, it’s clear the GOP, unfortunately, is lost beyond the point of return. When you’re one year out of key campaigns to take back Congress in 2010 and Meghan McCain is The Oracle of the party, you know it’s over. If Tina Brown thought Ms. McCain’s willingness to be a Useful Idiot for liberals would undermine the conservative movement (and consequently Sarah Palin), she should take a serious and long look at what their attacks on Palin provoked: a stronger, more independent, more determined conservative leader and base.

Enter now Sarah Palin with very encouraging comments that lead one to believe that she is indeed planning to do what she must: build an independent conservative movement and take this nation back from the liberals which now control both parties.Thanks liberals, for provoking Sarah into the national scene while vetting that family at the same time.

One thing I will say, the Washington Times with their headline for this exclusive interview reveal an anti-Palin stance. She is, don’t doubt, a threat to every existing political status quo. I hope the Washington Times and their editors realize, sooner than later, that the Palin movement is unstoppable and their credibility would be saved simply by reporting the news instead of becoming a GOP version of the NYT.

EXCLUSIVE: Palin to stump for conservative Democrats

The former Republican vice-presidential nominee and heroine to much of the GOP’s base said in an interview she views the electorate as embattled and fatigued by nonstop partisanship, and she is eager to campaign for Republicans, independents and even Democrats who share her values on limited government, strong defense and “energy independence.”

“I will go around the country on behalf of candidates who believe in the right things, regardless of their party label or affiliation,” …

“People are so tired of the partisan stuff — even my own son is not a Republican,” said Mrs. Palin, who stunned the political world earlier this month with her decision to step down as governor July 26 with 18 months left in her term.

Both her son, Track, 20, an enlisted soldier serving in Iraq, and her husband, Todd, are registered as “nonpartisan” in Alaska…

While the analysts and fellow politicians continue to debate the wisdom of her resignation decision, Mrs. Palin said she is eager to fight for her conservative beliefs when she leaves office.

The governor, 45, said she shared former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s view that Republicans, now trailing Democrats and independents in registration in many states, should back moderate-to-conservative Democrats in congressional districts and states where Republicans stand almost no chance of winning.

The object would be to build a majority coalition that reflects what polls suggest is the current center-right tilt of the U.S. electorate as a whole.

Doc99

The Tea Party Movement is truly bipartisan … Folks are fed up. Palin would be wise to tap into this sentiment.

Elaine

“How do we tell the ballgirls …..”

I say we round up all the “women” including Rhiana herself, who think Rhiana deserved the beating she got from her “boyfriend” and we beat the crap out of all of them for starters then we say, and now we are going to have your husbands, or boyfriends sign this little paper and then you can be admitted for a lobotomy (which was a perfectly legal thing to do by husbands pre-1950′s) since you “women” don’t apparently want to use your brains anyway for what it should be used for (independent thinking)and then you girls can go back to being happily exploited since you are a disgrace to our gender. But hey! That’s just me….
http://www.bloggersagainstchasebank.com Alessandro Machi

I go back to the 50′s and 60′s mom. Her own daughters may not have admired her enough as they began to see change happening in society and that somehow mom was a fuddy duddy.

Fast forward to now, and the same principle applies. Those that have learned to value their relationship with their own elderly parents, probable voted for Hillary Clinton.

Those who have decided to cleave onto their wireless gadgets are also drawn into people their own age, and they tend to belong to the Barack Obama fantasm.

http://www.dailypuma.com
arran

Thanks, pm317, for continuing this valuable discussion on feminism. Whoever said only women become more radical as they age hit on a truth.

I believe what violet advances, 2nd wavers squared, are our only hope for change and movement. We have seen doors open only by older women’s group efforts for all women. Without that commitment, the “wins” begin to disintegrate. Without that conviction to fight rampant sexism/misogyny, we remain a convenient group for jokes, for scapegoating, for continued images of subordination, for violence. Without an organization, each women who has been victimized, harassed, or discriminated against has to fight the system alone.

Women have to organize in a permanent bloc and end these “waves.”

pm317

I agree we do need some sort of organization but the current set (NOW for example) have become inadequate. Let us start with the name first, how about a genderless name that aims at fighting for equality of all (women and men)but most of the organization’s current battle will come from women’s issues and so be it. I also don’t like this generational “waves” thing. Arabella up thread had an astute comment about how opening up education opportunities have enabled younger generation to think there is no discrimination — that is perhaps true in their little world. But I doubt that they know what they will experience once they leave their cocoon.

arran

I’ve been working on a new name and zilch.

SWPAnnA

Betty Jean at FreeMeNow suggests;

The Majority United

which carries no baggage and communicates how effective the concept can become. The young ditzes are still learning. The boomer generation is as big as any gen will get.

As Greta & Hillary discovered, dismissive attitudes are the province of video-gaming guys who are in college but NOT going to class. Some of them get into the Obama Administration like Jon Favreau, but not nearly as many of them get into grad school as their traditionally studious female coed colleagues do.

http://www.rabblerouserruminations.blogspot.com/ Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy

Great post, pm317 – thank you!

Even with the educational opportunities afforded girls and women today, and even with Title IX, there are still pressures on girls/women to be almost as good as men, rather than EQUAL to men. For example, I watch a lot of soccer, and I cannot tell you the number of times women on the pitch or in the broadcast booth use primarily male pronouns.

Language DOES shape our reality. What is the message to girls/women if they are constantly being referred to in male pronouns??

It is not that the girls/women play a lesser game to the men, they play in slightly different ways than men. That doesn’t make it not as GOOD as, though. But if they are constantly referred to as MEN, it makes it seem that way, doesn’t it

How abt boys/men suing over “discrimination” in education if the girls/women are doing as well, or BETTER, than they are? What is the message there?

I think it’s clear. And it is a return to smart girls don’t show how smart they are, and they are TOTALLY screwed if they happen to be pretty, too (just ask Palin); women can’t show up men; and men are better than women. I think this past Primary/Election season made that ABUNDANTLY clear.

And that makes me sad/sick/angry…

Ellen D

Interestingly there are no “actors” and “actresses” any more – they are all called actors now.

Many years ago there were “aviators” and “aviatrix”. That seems to have gone by the board, thank goodness.

I actually liked the UNISEX movement in the sixties.

Honora

While I agree with much of what you say, I take offense at the marginalization of ‘women’s groups’. I don’t think that women should focus all their attention and efforts in these groups, but they do make incredible contributions. If we waited for the American Bar Association or the ACLU to come to women’s defense we would all die waiting. The Women’s Legal Defense Fund does wonderful work and has made life better for all Americans.

If a woman chooses to go into a ‘non-traditional field’ all power to her, but many women are going to be drawn to ‘traditional’ fields as well. My goal would be to encourage society to equally value the work of everyone, even those who labor in ‘traditionally female jobs’.

pm317

You just have to look at what went on with NOW during the election of a century. That’s one women’s group for you and where were Emily’s list and NARAL? The true test for these groups came last year and they failed. But then again my expectation of them was quite low to begin with. Yet I am not suggesting throw the baby out with the bath water. We need new ideas and perhaps new updated organizations.

Claudy

pm317 — I totally agree with your idea to start a new conversation about ‘feminism’ – our work is not done. I wish more younger gen females could grasp what they appear to be squandering by pandering to the Kos crowd.

Born in 1952, I’ve always felt I was born into a feminist era. I assumed opportunities would be available to me as I went through my career and personal life. Sadly, the glass ceiling was set rather low.

I went through a similar stage in my teens of dis-identifying with my mother, and grandmothers. However, I always recognized the women in family as individuals and I never disrespected them outright. And, of course, I outgrew it.

This gen seems hellbent on remaining in their teen years – rebelling against “Momism” (as my Dad used to call it) in much the same way their males counterparts do. The perennial adolescent syndrome.

I can almost count on being rejected by younger females now by virtue of my relative age, 57. They do not need our wisdom, warnings, experience, advice and they make it very clear they will not look at us let alone listen to us.

Blame it on men, the media, the celebrity culture – whatever it is, it is a vile sickness that needs to be addressed.

Women do not have full rights in our society. When younger women – as another poster said – experience the shame of being treated like a second class citizen maybe they will wake up.

We can not hope to found a new conversation/movement on being cool or hip unless younger women are engaged. (Whaddaya say we enlist O’s marketing gurus to crack the problem?)

There are many labels we have to outrun – nearly every label assigned to females is derogatory (while almost none deride males).

Regarding names – I like ‘equalists’ and ‘humanists’ – may be we don’t need a name yet. Maybe we roll up our sleeves and just get busy. Maybe we can set small goals of reaching out to one person — one young man, one young women – who we think could benefit from a consciousness raising session with Mom.

The thing that is the most troubling is seeing the extent younger women have bought into being over-sexualized. They don’t have much confidence in setting boundaries…is all I can say.

So given an inch, men take a mile. And women lose the high ground.

Ellen D

Start by watching television with your kids. When they see things through your eyes it will be easier for them to identify it again when they’re older.

Mandelay

What a terrific article with insights we cannot walk away from. Reading this article, and another by Tina Brown on Hillary Clinton, really make me wonder where “the movement” is headed. As you say, “we” (women? the human race?) think we’ve arrived but we have not. Take a look at this article with the eye-catching title “Obama’s Other Wife” (Hillary Clinton) by Tina Brown:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-07-13/obamas-other-wife-1/

Ani

My own .02 on Tina Brown:

She is also full of it, however, and is practicing her own form of revisionist in re Hillary. She wrote an article a couple of weeks ago, I believe, before the Palin resignation, talking about what Palin could learn from Hillary. In one of her paragraphs, she pointed out that “Hillary had been humbled at the polls” — excuse me? She won the popular vote while being outspent three to one with the DNC and the full bore media stabbing her in the back daily. Yet she still basically made it a tie?

How in the hell was she “humbled” — if she was humbled by anything, it was the realization that she was working with a bunch of lying a**es.

Since then I take what Tina Brown says with a grain of salt. She seems to like to find ways to run Hillary down.

pm317

You’re right, Ani. Tina Brown.. not impressed. Same old media ~~gasbag~~ personality. That article too is a backhanded compliment/no compliment. They all seem to know which side of their bread is buttered and are willing to sell themselves for it. They are not doing us any favor.

Mandelay

Tina Brown is no more than a gossip columnist, but I think her article hits on a basic premise of marketing — perception is all. Whether or not Hillary Clinton has been hobbled by Obama is not important … but it sure looks like she has been. Obama is the king of marketing. These days, every time I search the world stage and find Hillary Clinton missing from view, and every time I hear Bill Clinton defending/promoting Mr. Obama, I cannot help but cringe. There’s a voice inside me that’s been nagging away over this. The Hillary Clinton who campaigned with such intelligence and passion, out in the open, among the people, in full voice, with astonishing command of the issues, is now in the shadows. Sure you can find her on C-Span now and then, but who’s watching (besides me and a few more Hillary fans)? And I think Tina Brown, gossip columnist disguised as a journalist, hit that nail on the head.

pm317

Obama is the king of marketing.

I grudgingly agree with you on that. Your point about Tina Brown and her article is well taken too. But if you read about John Batchelor’s article from last night you know that Russia was a nightmare. When will such things catch up with 0bama? If things go too wrong on the foreign policy front, I worry about Hillary being sabotaged by his team too. Should we be consoled that what she did with her 18 million would have been forgotten by now if she was just a senator and not in a serious position like SoS, whether 0bama keeps her in shadows or not.

See my message below — I would like for her to get out of this at a strategic moment and run as an independent in 2012. Bill’s legacy can take care of itself. That will be the new movement I dream of.

arran

Tina Brown may be all that you say she is; I’m not arguing with your critique of her. However, I’ll venture out beyond Mandelay and add that my hunch is that Axelrod has more influence over Obama than even Rahm and is fashioning the perception. Neither of these 2 men wanted Hillary in the Cabinet. I have to say that I believe Hillary is being marginalized. How much I do not know. I want her to quit.

arran

I’m pulling back on my remark about quitting and agree that she should fill her resume with foreign policy credentials and run in 2012.

Mandelay

I did see your comment below about the 2012 four-way election. A very, very interesting scenario.
She (Hillary) would need to detach herself from the administration very soon to execute that scenario. Break with the party … build the base for a new party … get on the ballot in every state … get the fundraisers to break with the party and back her. I just don’t see her doing that, unless something extraordinary happened to allow her to emerge again into the spotlight.
But Obama continues to slide in the polls so I’m willing to stick my toe out of the box and ask: What do you think of a Clinton-Palin ticket in 2012? I know, absurd. But the current climate is absurd. Let me daydream a bit.
Without some kind of breakout movement that aims to heal the slashed soul of this nation, nothing will change, no matter how much “hope” is sold. The last time this nation split we had a civil war. And that wasn’t pretty. Anyway, Clinton-Palin 2012. Let’s say, just for fun, they announce it next week. And they go on the road together next week. The opposite ends of “the women’s movement,” together at last.
Well, even if Obama passed a health care bill that gave free insurance to all Americans, he would never see the front page or lead news story again, spending the rest of his first and only term as “old news.” Eventually, suffering the extreme effects of withdrawal from massive self-induced publicity, he retires quietly, another presidential library in the making, making occasional appearances on Larry King and “The Levi Johnston Hour.”
Clinton-Palin in 2012? Too absurd to ever happen? But Obama created the first mega-celebrity presidency, starring himself. What could top that? Maybe something totally down to earth.

pm317

“The Levi Johnston Hour.”

LOL..

Clinton-Palin 2012 is too radical and not pragmatic. But if Palin throws her hat in the ring, Hillary should definitely do it but on her own and pick a good solid Democrat (preferably of young age so he can carry on after her) to run with her and peel away votes from both 0bama and the Repubs. I just saw on Greta, she and Geithner are meeting with the Chinese in a less publicized meeting and hmm.. I wonder what they will be talking about.

Mandelay

I saw that item about the meeting with her, Geithner and the Chinese. Are they commissioned to convince the Chinese to buy more of our debt to finance the Obama health care program? The Chinese own so much of us at this point, they must be getting very nervous about the whole thing.
I agree, my dream of Clinton-Palin is too radical and not at all pragmatic, but what the hell? How else can they knock Obama off the news? Without his nonstop publicity to create the perception that he’s working so hard for all of us, he’s all copy, graphics and slogo. Don’t know what the answer is but, as a lifelong Democrat, I’m pretty sure it’s not in the Democratic Party. And I’m pretty sure it’s not in the Republican Party. I am more willing to listen to someone who disassociates herself/himself from the two parties.
I even made myself laugh at “The Levi Johnston Hour” but this teenage twerp is quoted on the news as if he’s some political insider. Age of absurdity. I can see Hills and Sarah giving him “the stare.” “Now go sit down and be quiet, Levi. There’s a good boy.” OK, enough dreaming for tonight! I promise to be a little more practical tomorrow. Ciao!

http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

And a presidency/vice-presidency in the US of WOMEN would really eclipse the one term of maybe American Obama/Soetoro/Obama.

Do you think they would pardon Obama?

pm317

From the article: Tina Brown may be right about this line:

Those who voted for Hillary wonder how long she’ll be content with an office wifehood of the Saudi variety.

Hopefully not much longer. Here is a scenario for 2012: Palin decides to run as an independent. She will definitely siphon off votes on the Repub side. How about if Hillary ran as an independent too? A 4-way race. I bet you my last dollar she will be the winner (especially if 0bama wrecks the economy further). I am all in favor of this outcome, it will be sweet retribution.
Peggy Sue

Sally Quinn, the grand dame of DC, also made unbelievably condescending comments about Sarah Palin in an interview with Greta Van S. She spoke about what great contributions Palin could make by representing children with disabilities [true] but the subtext was: if only she knew her place and stayed home.

I’m not a political supporter of Palin but I wanted to put my foot through the TV. Plus I think I heard Greta say later that Sally Quinn had earler agreed with Letterman [at least before the heat went up] and defended his smarmy comments as mere “humor.”

I have a feeling that there’s going to be a lot of “rewritten” history from all these hoity-toity, capital “L” liberals when the s**t hits the fan.

But it really annoys me when women with a public voice so freely and cavalierly diss other women in public service.

Infuriating!

pm317

This is Sally Quinn for you. Nobody on TV gets my blood boiling as this woman. She is a really nobody and I don’t know why she is where she is.

From: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,907745-2,00.html

The daughter of a retired Army general, Quinn’s peripatetic “Army-brat” life caused her to attend 22 schools before she graduated from Smith College in 1963. She intended to be “a famous movie star” but gave it up after only six weeks of trying to be an actress in New York. Over the next few years, she worked as a go-go girl, a public relations agent for a Coney Island animal husbandry exhibit, and social secretary to the Algerian Ambassador in Washington. The story of her subsequent hiring by the Washington Post may contain a moral for those who would make too much of her present lack of background in TV. “Can you show me something you’ve written?” asked Managing Editor Benjamin Bradlee. “I’ve never written anything,” admitted Quinn. Pause. “Well,” said Bradlee, “nobody’s perfect.”

Peggy Sue

What a background, eh? And yet, she acts [and trys to sound] like a DC Empress.

Maybe it’s that acting thing, Mistress Thesbian, in full bloom. Some things you never quite shake.

Ani

Please do not put her in any category with actors. Anyone who was a dilettante in the profession for six weeks has no business ever calling themselves an actor, thespian, or anything of the kind. Trust me on that one. There are too many truly talented hard working rank and file professionals in the business not deserving of anyone’s enmity. (And by the way, a number of them didn’t vote for “The One, either.)

http://noquarter foxyladi14

equality thats all we want,
foxx

Feminism is the most powerful word to describe the movement. We should not surrender it and in fact I doubt we can. The word isn’t going away.

Just look at all the reactions it gets. “I’m not a feminist, but . . .” “Feminazis” etc. Those are all indications of the word’s power.

Embrace the word proudly. Groups like NOW have only shamed themselves, not the word. Not the idea.

pm317

The word need not go away. I am not even suggesting that it is a bad word (pl. read the first paragraph again.) It has done its part. When the conversation among women turns into a fight like “I am a feminist” “no, you’re not a feminist” “I am a post-feminist” “only pro-choice people are feminists” “only liberals are feminists” and this takes the cake “Hillary is not a feminist because she is so mainstream”, or “Palin is not a feminist because she is a republican”, we are not doing ourselves any favor. We need a new language and a new conversation and a new attitude. Our detractors are happy to see us fighting among ourselves like this.

foxx

I would not blame these arguments on the word or any word. You think they wouldn’t happen if people were using other words?

What I think we need is less talk and more action.

trixta

Absolutely, foxx! More action indeed!

http://deleted BuzzisbackLatte

Thank-you for your comment. It’s goes with the point I’m trying – very inarticulately – to make. As long as we need a group, need to be a victim, need to tear down someone else in order to be on top – (insert Nancy Pelosi vs Hillary Clinton), need to identify by ideology, we – women – defeat any action to gain equality.

I feel sorry for the twenty-something generation. Their role models are Brittney Spears – a successful woman with a completely screwed up personal life and all the lovely rap and hip hop low expectation for women lyrics. Great, huh? Are those women going to look back fondly on ” I got 99 problems but a bitch ain’t one ‘em” or “Doncha” by the Pussycat Dolls?
rw

IMO, a word the encompasses that “women’s rights are human rights.” A word that ties women to the whole of humanity, not one that isolates them.

The road to women’s equality is different from that of race, ethnicity, or class. Unlike people of a particular race or ethnicity (even class), who had a refuge in the home and community, women are totally integrated with those fingered as the cause of their inequality = men. Their support group, the family, had husbands, fathers, lovers, brothers, sons. Men must be included in the solution.

I read of a UN program that for 10 years had targeted girls in developing nations with programs of education and equality. But, it took 10 for that anachronistic organization to realize that boys had to be included in the program…10 years for them to figure out that young girls were learning to read and write and to have ambitions only to go “home” and have it slapped out of them by the males in their lives.

How to reach the younger generation, by making women’s rights trendy and cool, by eliciting spokespeople that they identify with, by making it inclusive and hammering home that the problem is not a whole gender but a mindset exhibited by both genders, by creating websites (facebook, myspace,twittering etc.) that post sexist comments by people in the media and celebrities – out the sexists not by berating them but by wording comments that state how backward, old, dated such sexism is.
http://www.lookyoungertricks.com/ elise

Amen to that, HoB. Why are young women willing to be degraded and reduced to a piece of meat? Why do the role models have to be drug or alcohol addicted, irresponsible party girls and receive endless media attention for their bad behavior?

Last year, when I still watched MSNBC, I recall Olberman saying he was reporting on Brittney, Paris, Anna Nichole, Lindsay Lohan et al because his producers forced him to, yet he gave nightly updates and relished the coverage.

There has to be a way to engage younger women and get control of the message again. The movement began with young women and was apart from the Civil Rights issue because, even then, we knew we were excluded and left on our own to fight for our rights.
P.S. – Sorry, forgot to tell you great post!
wbboei

So now we have what? Post modern art, post industrial society and post feminism. Only none of those evolutions seem to be working very well I take it. I am not sure what it means to be post feminist. And neither are they. Maybe it means that if you are NARL you support an unqualified man over a highly qualified woman. Maybe it means you fail to speak out when Matthews, Schuster and Olberstrumfurer utter crude statements. Or, maybe it means that you have no sypathy for the victim, and fail to note that there but for the grace of God goeth I or my daughters. Whatever the explanation, Hillary was the real victim of this, and for Hillary supporters it is a personal vendetta to be pursuded against these perpetrators at the proper time and in the proper forum within the bounds of the law.
Katmoon

The public at large is equally responsible for allowing the sale of all things sexist 24/7 on television. I believe in free enterprise, but not when it comes to selling flesh. Pardon the following reference, not meaning to be vulgar; but when an entire generation considers secondary characteristics of adult maturity unnecessary and unattractive, such as “body” hair, you have at the simplest a basic set up to not accept the human package as it is made. It is beyond lookism when we have so much of our culture dedicated to keeping people perpetually “young” by use of chemicals, shaving, and surgery. What is the self-image of a woman now? I believe that plays right into how we allow language to be used in reference to how we are perceived, at any level.
This is how bigotry and prejudice is perpetuated. Create an image of what someone “should” be, then all who do not follow like sheep are ostracized.
How about the “Human” movement? For once taking into account we are not all the same, but we are similar, we are human beings, not human doings. ( humans do this, humans do that…you get the point). I am not a storage box to be shelved and labeled, neither is any other human being. Yes, I eat I sleep, I work, but particular to my individual traits, my one commonality with all other humans is, that very individuality.

pm317

I know what you mean by not wanting to accept the human package. I have a real life example for you — we were on the ferry back from Martha’s vineyard and it was very crowded. My in-laws were with us. They were sitting on a bench and we were standing next to a group of 20-30 year-olds and their parents. The mom and the young women and men were looking at my MIL and making jokes about how she is a prime target for an “Extreme Makeover”, the show. I wanted to scream “leave her alone”. She is a 70+ year-old grandma happy with herself and her life.

mountainaires

we were standing next to a group of 20-30 year-olds and their parents. The mom and the young women and men were looking at my MIL and making jokes about how she is a prime target for an “Extreme Makeover

Wow. That’s outrageous. I cannot even imagine how hurtful that must have been for your MIL. A “mom” encouraging such rude, cruel, and boorish behavior in her children and their friends is utterly incomprehensible to me.

I can’t stand bullies. And, I’m apt to get myself involved when I see bullying. It must have been very hard for you not to say anything; you must have been thinking of your MIL’s feelings…

pm317

I was and thankfully MIL didn’t hear it or see it. It was all noisy and crowded. My husband was standing next to me and I don’t think he noticed it (I don’t remember sharing this with him either for fear that it will hurt him).

Katmoon

I think I may have opened my mouth in that situation; boorish behavior and never any repercussions; it happens often and with much glee. I have never had an issue with what someone wants to do to themselves, but when billion dollar empires are built around trying to stylize the average___(fill in the blank) I feel the bile rising in my throat.

I recall the images put forth and their demise; the obvious need to change products ( remember Sambo’s restaurant , and the packaging on Aunt Jamima syrup, I do) Better yet, cigar store Indians, and lamp holding figurines; I could go on. The marketing isn’t subtle now, it is accepted. Therein lies the difference. Seems many people are willing to opt for that look alike makeover, vs. the different ways our bodies are made up. I guess it’s all about creating stepford people these days, men, women and gender identifications alike. Horrible. Logan’s Run anyone? I suppose I am long overdue for “Carnivale”.

Katmoon

In the rinse spam cycle?
mountainaires

I have no personal inclination to join “women’s groups” either; being a complete contrarian, I don’t like to be a part of any group. I find that the moment you’re a part of a group, your opinions become constrained by group norms, forcing you into a box. I’ve always resisted that sort of thing. It’s just a personal quirk, I guess.

NOW and other groups have failed completely, and I rejected them all a long time ago. I have now sworn off any political donations as well. I belong to no political party.

I think feminism is dead as a movement, but that doesn’t mean that the idea of feminism is dead; that doesn’t mean women’s rights are finished; it could even mean an opportunity for women–at least those who, like Justice Ginsburg, “get it.”

Those who “get it” will protect their individualism, their independence of mind, and set goals for themselves as they grow. Meeting those goals is really all they need in order to become women of substance, like Sonia Sotomayor, Hillary Clinton, Justice Ginsburg and others.

Those who limit themselves to “Kos-ism” are fools; so what, there are a lot of fools in this world. Let them waste a life, it’s their choice. Why should women care about other women who choose to waste their independence of spirit, of mind, or to limit their choices?

That’s my question: Why should women care about other women, just because they’re women? Why should anyone care about women at Daily Kos who choose to limit their minds, become part of the mob mentality there? Or anywhere for that matter.

Hypocrisy runs rampant:

The left is just as guilty as the right–look at what happened from the left attacking Palin’s daughters; now, the Freepers are attacking Obama’s 11-year-old daughter viciously, just for wearing a peace sign on a t-shirt!

The victims are young girls; feminists don’t even give a shit about that. It’s all about “their side” instead of being about supporting principles like “free speech,” or “independence of mind” or “individualism.”

Being part of a herd is constraining. Maybe younger women see it from that perspective. As long as women stick together in a herd, it’s harder to stand out for excellence. If one has excellence, being part of a herd is a waste of time.

Just some thoughts on it, thanks for the blog post.
Barry 0351

Feminism has made decision making inside the marriage between Husbands and wives impossible.
There is no one in charge in todays marriage there is just two people at odds going in different directions for different reasons.
This results in nothing getting done and frustration leads to divorce.
someone has to be in charge “lead”
someone has to support and back up the decisions made “follow”
OR
get a divorce “get out of the way”
lead, follow or get out of the way.
women have been taught to stand up for womens rights even at the expense of the family, marriage and children simply to prevent Men from being in charge.
If a woman can handle the job this is fine but when a woman cannot lead and will not follow for feminist agenda then divorce is the only way this is the reason for single mother’s and their problems.
Marriage has become a casualty of the feminism war against men.

pm317

What a load of cxxx. Can’t disagree with you more and I don’t even know where to begin. All I can say is with men (Barry) like you and the younger generation of twits, we are doomed.

Astra14

All you have to said to Barry, pm317, is that marriage is a partnership. It works very well when there is no leader and no follower (the follower is usually the one who gets trampled and spends their married life miserable – and is very much going to take the marriage to divorce court).

There are plenty of marriages that work as a partnership, when the relationship is based on RESPECT. Feminism did not destroy marriage – it may have just changed the dynamic to two people having to learn to work together for what is best for the family.

It’s those people who are control-freaks who are the ones who are more inclined to bring about the end of the marriages – it could be the husband or the wife in those cases. Feminism is NOT about control, but about equality, which is totally different.

pm317

Say it for me, Astra.

trixta

PM, Barry must be a troll out of the 19th century and not worthy of comment.

Katmoon

Putting on the hip waders on that one.(anyone else need a pair?) What a large load.

Simply, neither husband nor wife feels an issue of lead or follow, or dissolution of marriage due to same. Equality as in respect has a natural ebb and flow to it; which like the tide cannot be forced, nor presumed, rather nourished.
arran

“…the feminism war against men.” You need to raise that consciousness, but few in the majority ever do any reading or thinking about what women are objecting to as it doesn’t matter to them as long as the status quo is maintained.