Chit Chat

"The New Women Warriors"

novella1186novella1186 member
5000 Comments 500 Love Its Second Anniversary First Answer
edited April 2015 in Chit Chat
I love love love this article. It took me a while to read it; it's pretty long, but it's so good! 

It's about the current battle to get an amendment into the US constitution to protect equal rights for women, and it details some of the specific women fighting for it and what they're doing. If you have time to read it, do it! 

Some interesting excerpts: 

The fight on the national stage grew quiet, but the ERA has been reintroduced every congressional session since then. With the exception of 1983, when House representatives voted on it once more, the ERA has never again made it out of committee and onto the floor for a vote.

Rep. Maloney hopes this year will shift the tide.

"I spend 75% if not more of my time fighting to hold on to what we [women] already have, not advancing to the next level," Maloney says. "This is going to be the decade of the woman. We need to pass it by 2020 and finish the job."

..... The need, they say, is as evident today as ever. While more than 80% of countries guarantee gender equality in their constitutions, the UCLA's WORLD Policy Analysis Center found, 32 do not, including the United States.

....."The main opponent we face is lack of knowledge," Hager says. "Seven out of 10 Americans think we already have it. Nine out of 10 think we should have it. Why don't we have it? Because seven out of 10 think we do."

....Just look at the recent flood of state legislation meant to chip away at reproductive rights, they say. See how religious freedoms trumped women's rights when the Supreme Court allowed Hobby Lobby to refuse comprehensive birth control coverage. Peek into corporate boardrooms and notice the dearth of female CEOs.

Pay and other inequities hurt women -- and, by extension, families and communities (including men). Victims of domestic violence are less likely to leave if they can't stand on their own feet financially. And a lifetime of wage discrimination means women and their families also pay a price later when it comes to Social Security benefits.

There's some powerful stuff here. 
ETF tiny text 

image

Re: "The New Women Warriors"

  • Thank you for sharing this! I'm ashamed to say it, but I am one of those people who didn't realize there weren't any constitutional protections for women. It seems absolutely wild to me that this amendment wasn't passed in the '20s, and even more wild to me that it didn't pass in the '80s.

    I'm definitely going to be sharing this with people today.
  • abcdevonn said:

    Thank you for sharing this! I'm ashamed to say it, but I am one of those people who didn't realize there weren't any constitutional protections for women. It seems absolutely wild to me that this amendment wasn't passed in the '20s, and even more wild to me that it didn't pass in the '80s.


    I'm definitely going to be sharing this with people today.
    Yeah, I learned a few things from the article too, and I found some of it to be totally mind-blowing! 

    The cases that went to the Supreme Court, just for the women to be told that there's no protections for them, were so heartbreaking. WTF, America? 
    image
  • The opening paragraph rubs me the wrong way.

    "Though she certainly wouldn't have called herself one at the time, Bettina Hager suspects she was a feminist by age 6 or 7. She knew she was "supposed to like" pink and instead announced to anyone who'd listen that her favorite color was navy blue. She loved math and was hell-bent on running faster than boys."

    All of that is about defying gender roles which is only a small part of feminism (and for some feminists it isn't part of their feminism at all). I can like pink and still be a feminist, or be a "tomboy" but not a feminist.

    ETA: I'm not saying this is a bad article. Just that well meaning authors can still wind up perpetuating stereotypes, such as in this case that feminists must all have "masculine" traits.

    Yes!!!

    I hate math. Not because I have a vagina. But because I have dyscalculia. Math is hard for me because numbers don't make sense. Also I like art. I fucking love science. I love purple. I love heels.

    But I think we can all agree I'm a feminist. 
  • The opening paragraph rubs me the wrong way.

    "Though she certainly wouldn't have called herself one at the time, Bettina Hager suspects she was a feminist by age 6 or 7. She knew she was "supposed to like" pink and instead announced to anyone who'd listen that her favorite color was navy blue. She loved math and was hell-bent on running faster than boys."

    All of that is about defying gender roles which is only a small part of feminism (and for some feminists it isn't part of their feminism at all). I can like pink and still be a feminist, or be a "tomboy" but not a feminist.

    ETA: I'm not saying this is a bad article. Just that well meaning authors can still wind up perpetuating stereotypes, such as in this case that feminists must all have "masculine" traits.

    I didn't like that particular part either. As soon as I read it I was all ready to be like "here we go, women can't like pink because reasons!" but I was happy to see it got better. I just really wish people would drop that shit. I love pink. I love makeup. I am feminine and "girly" and someone told me my sneezes sound like a fairy crying. Whatever. That doesn't make me less keen on women's rights and equality! I will kick anyone in the face with my pink-painted toes if they try to take away my rights.
  • The opening paragraph rubs me the wrong way.

    "Though she certainly wouldn't have called herself one at the time, Bettina Hager suspects she was a feminist by age 6 or 7. She knew she was "supposed to like" pink and instead announced to anyone who'd listen that her favorite color was navy blue. She loved math and was hell-bent on running faster than boys."

    All of that is about defying gender roles which is only a small part of feminism (and for some feminists it isn't part of their feminism at all). I can like pink and still be a feminist, or be a "tomboy" but not a feminist.

    ETA: I'm not saying this is a bad article. Just that well meaning authors can still wind up perpetuating stereotypes, such as in this case that feminists must all have "masculine" traits.

    I thought exactly the same thing about that paragraph! It bugged me because I love the color pink (always have) and I love make-up and girly stuff, so I guess I don't break down gender stereotypes, but anyone who knows me knows that I'm 100% a feminist. So... ? 
    image
  • abcdevonn said:

    The opening paragraph rubs me the wrong way.

    "Though she certainly wouldn't have called herself one at the time, Bettina Hager suspects she was a feminist by age 6 or 7. She knew she was "supposed to like" pink and instead announced to anyone who'd listen that her favorite color was navy blue. She loved math and was hell-bent on running faster than boys."

    All of that is about defying gender roles which is only a small part of feminism (and for some feminists it isn't part of their feminism at all). I can like pink and still be a feminist, or be a "tomboy" but not a feminist.

    ETA: I'm not saying this is a bad article. Just that well meaning authors can still wind up perpetuating stereotypes, such as in this case that feminists must all have "masculine" traits.

    I didn't like that particular part either. As soon as I read it I was all ready to be like "here we go, women can't like pink because reasons!" but I was happy to see it got better. I just really wish people would drop that shit. I love pink. I love makeup. I am feminine and "girly" and someone told me my sneezes sound like a fairy crying. Whatever. That doesn't make me less keen on women's rights and equality! I will kick anyone in the face with my pink-painted toes if they try to take away my rights.
    Bahaha!  Dying. 


    image
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards