We have NOT come a long way, baby

I’m the stereotypical PUMA.  I came of age in the 70s and joined the UWAG (University Women’s Action Group) while at the University of Nebraska working on the first of several degrees.  I remember fighting hard to get tougher rape laws in place including getting officers assigned to rape cases out of the Property Crimes Department and lobbying for laws that would let raped wives charge their husbands with rape.  This was not possible at that time.  We’ve made considerable progress on that front.  We now don’t need two to three people to witness rapes in order to get rapists prosecuted.  We also can charge our husbands with rape.  Violet crimes against women are no longer consider property crimes.

I also worked hard for the ERA.  That failed to pass although I travelled to both Missouri and Oklahoma to try to get the last few states to pass it.  I also was trying to fight Nebraska’s attempt to take back it’s pro-ERA vote sponsored by my local state senator who was also a neighbor and father to two of the least popular guys in my high school.  I always thought he’d sponsor the bill because neither of his sons had much luck getting dates back in the day.  He was mad that women could actually support themselves and therefor not have to marry the first thing that comes along to survive their adult lives.

I’m now an economist, and perhaps Equal Pay for Equal Work is the subject that is nearest and dearest too me.  We have another chance to right this problem.  What amazes me is that the current pay gap faced by my young daughters today –one being 25 and in her last year of med school and the other 18 and heading to university–is the same pay gap I faced at their age. This is one legacy I’d rather not leave to them. Women still earn 77 cents to men’s $1 for the same job with the same qualifications.  There is not one state in the country where women have gained traction on men’s pay.  There is an act now in Congress seeking to right this wrong once in for all,  it is called the Paycheck Fairness Act.

The Paycheck Fairness Act would “close loopholes that have allowed employers to avoid responsibility for discriminatory pay” and strengthen accountability in the workplace. The legislation increases penalties for sex discrimination in pay unless the company has a business-related reason for the inequality in wages. The PFA puts gender discrimination sanctions on equal footing with other forms of wage discrimination ­ such as those based on race, disability, or age, allowing women to file lawsuits for compensatory and punitive damages. The bill also prohibits employers retaliating against employees who share salary information with their co-workers. The legislation also strengthens opportunities for women. The Act requires that the Department of Labor “improve outreach and training efforts to work with employers in order to eliminate pay disparities” and “creates a new grant program to help strengthen the negotiation skills of girls and women.”

Source: From the Progress Reporthttp://pr.thinkprogress.org/

So think about which Senators would be most likely fighting for gender equality that would be the sponsors of the bill?   Yup, it’s our Hillary again. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) put this bill into play

The Institute of Women’s Policy Research found that this wage disparity will cost women anywhere from $400,000 to $2 million over a lifetime in lost wages. An April Senate report found that in contrast to previous slowdowns, the current economic downturn “is hitting women harder than men. They are suffering more job losses and larger reductions in wages than the general population.” 

I, like any parent, want to leave my children in a better position in life.  Just by having daughters instead of sons, I know they will suffer the same paycheck inequality that I have endured throughout my adult life.  This is yet another reason to thank Hillary and to write your Senators and Congress to support this Bill.

The senators that are sponsoring this bill:

The Paycheck Fairness Act is co-sponsored by Senators Joseph Biden (D-DE), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Christopher Dodd (D-CT), Russell Feingold (D-WI), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Edward Kennedy (D-MA), John Kerry (D-MA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Harry Reid (D-NV), Charles Schumer (D-NY), and Bernard Sanders (I-VT).

Also, NOTICE who’s name is missing?  

For more information please go to Senator Clintons site:

http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=272301&&


Senators Clinton and Murray take on the HHS Department

Yesterday, folks woke up to the new assault on birth control.  Shero’s Senator Clinton and Patty Murray are on top of this.   Both penis-impaired presidential candidates remain silent.   The is especially appalling because ONE of them was endorsed by NARAL.

From our Sheros:

“It is outrageous that the Bush administration is once again putting ideology over women’s health. Instead of undercutting access to contraception and family planning services, the Bush Administration should put prevention first,” said Senator Clinton.

“On the first day of his administration, the President reinstated the Mexico City global gag clause, a harsh, anti-family planning policy that hurt the world’s poorest women and children. Now, on his way out the door it appears that he is trying to limit women’s health care options here at home,” Murray said. “This misguided attempt to restrict health care services and limit access to contraceptives defeats our common goal of reducing the number of abortions in this country.”

Additionally, both Senators sent a joint letter to the Secretary that heads  the Health and Human Services Department:

Secretary Michael O. Leavitt
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201

Dear Mr. Secretary:

It has come to our attention that the Department of Health and Human Services may be preparing draft regulations that would create new obstacles for women seeking contraceptive services.

One of the most troubling aspects of the proposed rules is the overly-broad definition of “abortion.” This definition would allow health-care corporations or individuals to classify many common forms of contraception – including the birth control pill, emergency contraception and IUDs – “abortions” and therefore to refuse to provide contraception to women who need it.

As a consequence, these draft regulations could disrupt state laws securing women’s access to birth control. They could jeopardize federal programs like Medicaid and Title X that provide family-planning services to millions of women. They could even undermine state laws that ensure survivors of sexual assault and rape receive emergency contraception in hospital emergency rooms.

We strongly urge you to reconsider these regulations before they are released. We are extremely concerned by this proposal’s potential to affect millions of women’s reproductive health.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely yours,
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
Senator Patty Murray

If Obama is serious about getting women’s votes, then he needs to get serious about standing up for women’s rights.  Where is the voice of the presumed democratic candidate for president on this issue?  It’s time for all women to get behind the movement to stop Obama’s  throne grab in Denver.


Bush and his Theocrats wage their War against Birth Control AGAIN!

One of my progressive friends stays on top of all issues and has an extensive email list leftover from the Presidential Primary 4 years ago.  We remain in touch.  One of the Doctor’s on her list emailed us this bit of information concerning the ongoing attempt by religious right elements in the Bush administration to label everything associated with birth control abortion then de-fund it so it is unavailable to the most vulnerable women or make its use outright illegal.

It is amazing to me that we continue to fight the battles we thought won years ago.  Margaret Sanger would be outraged.

DAILY WOMEN’S HEALTH POLICY REPORT

NATIONAL POLITICS & POLICY | Bush Administration Developing Rule That
Could Limit Access to Birth Contro
l
[July 15, 2008]

The Bush administration is developing a regulation that would define
abortion as “any of the various procedures — including the
prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the
performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in
the termination of the life of a human being in utero between
conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation,

the New York Times reports. The draft proposal leaked to the Times
also would require all recipients of aid from HHS to certify they
will not refuse to hire health care workers who object to abortion
and certain types of birth control.

According to the Times, to receive funding under any program
administered by HHS, researchers, clinics, medical schools and
hospitals would have to sign “written certifications” that they will
not discriminate against people who object to abortion or certain
contraception. The certification also would be required of state and
local governments when allocating grants to hospitals and other
institutions that have policies against providing abortions, the
Times reports. The administration said it could discontinue federal
aid to individuals or entities that discriminate against people who
oppose abortion on the basis of “religious beliefs or moral
convictions.” The leaked proposal — which circulated in HHS on
Monday — said the new requirement is needed to guarantee that
federal funds do not “support morally coercive or discriminatory
practices or policies in violation of federal law.” The proposal also
expresses concern about state laws that require hospitals to provide
emergency contraception to rape survivors who request it, according
to the Times.

Reaction

Mary Jane Gallagher, president of the National Family Planning and
Reproductive Health Association, said, “The proposed definition of
abortion is so broad that it would cover many types of birth control,
including oral contraceptives and emergency contraception.” She
added, “We worry that under the proposal, contraceptive services
would become less available to low-income and uninsured women.” Nancy
Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said, “Why on earth is
the Bush administration trying to discourage doctors and clinics from
providing contraception to women who need it?” Christina Pearson, a
spokesperson for HHS, declined to discuss the draft rule. “We don’t
normally comment on whether we are considering changes in
regulations,” Pearson said (Pear, New York Times, 7/15).

http://www.nationalpartnership.org/site/News2?
abbr=daily2_&page=NewsArticle&id=11915&security=1201&news_iv_ctrl=-1

There continues to be an element in this society that will not let the majority opinion on reproductive rights and birth control stand.  They have taken their battle against women and their radical views on the definition of human life to all levels of government.  Their sneak attacks continue.  Please write your congressional representatives and senators and ask them to stop the President from making law’s with executive rules.


Guest Post by Shtuey: Women’s rights: They’re not just for Women anymore

On March 25, 1911 a tragedy struck the city of New York that forever changed the Women’s Movement. Near closing time, from an unknown source, a fire ripped through the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory killing 146 people.  Of those, 126 were women.  Though valiant efforts were made to save the Triangle workers, a locked exit and inadequate fire escapes doomed many of the immigrant men and women that worked there.  The grizzly scene of young girls holding hands with their coworkers, leaping to their deaths, rather than face the flames behind them, their burned and mangled bodies strewn upon the sidewalk, shocked the nation.

The women’s labor movement had been called to action two years earlier by Clara Lemlich, a 19 year old Ukranian Jewish immigrant who had been savagely beaten for her union involvement. Her modest but impassioned call for a vote for action began a shirtwaist makers’ strike that rocked New York City.  The movement found new force in the deaths of the young women in the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, an event which also drove the final push in the fight to secure the right of franchise for women in America, as was seen at the 1912 New York City March for Suffrage.  Some 20,000 people marched.  A reported half million lined the streets.  But the coals that stoked the fires of these movements were not kindled on those ill fated floors of the Asch Building in Manhattan.  The match was struck upstate, with relative quiet, 63 years earlier in the town of Seneca Falls.

Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott found themselves in a situation oft repeated in the past 160 years.  Denied seats at the 1840 anti-slavery convention in London, due to their gender, Mott and Stanton agreed that a convention on women’s rights needed to be held.  Eight years later it came to pass, the result of Mott visiting family not far from Stanton’s home in Seneca Falls, New York.

The call was unassuming.  An unsigned notice was placed in the local paper advertising the convention.  Three hundred-forty women and forty men, most from within a five mile radius, attended the convention.

The task of constructing a declarative document fell upon Stanton.  Using the Declaration of Independence as her guide she constructed what she entitled the Declaration of Sentiments.  Within this document lay the undeniable and unshakable truth still contested by the ignorant today (some of whom can be seen blathering away on an almost daily basis on cable television news networks): “All men and all women are created equal.”

One hundred and forty-seven years later, then First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, went to Beijing to address an international women’s conference themed, “Listen to the Women.”  In a singular act of bravery, and at great political and personal risk, Senator Clinton, standing on the shoulders of Stanton, Mott, Anthony, Lemlich, Roosevelt and others too many to name, changed the course of the conversation of women’s rights forever.  Echoing Stanton’s declaration she proclaimed to the world; “Women’s rights are human rights, and human rights are women’s rights.”

In other words, women’s rights: they’re not just for women anymore.

It is no longer acceptable to discuss women’s rights as being owned solely by women.  This is an issue of what it means to be human.  In 1995 Hillary Clinton made it plain that it is no longer acceptable for anyone, regardless of gender, skin color, religion, sexual orientation, age, nationality, or creed to be oppressed whether it be physically, emotionally, sexually, or economically, and that it is time for all of us to take responsibility for protecting and defending each other’s rights to live lives of freedom and equality.  Whether it is being paid equal wages for equal time, access to the same employment opportunities, or to share our lives with the partners of our choice, every American citizen should have equal protection under the Constitution of the United States, and every citizen of the world should be recognized as having equal protection of their inalienable human rights.  There is only one race; the human race.  When the rights of one human are violated, we are all violated.  When one of us has obstacles thrown up against them, is oppressed, insulted, attacked, or enslaved then we are obligated by our mutual humanity to stand up in their defense.  That is what Dr. King saw from the top of the mountain.

When Senator Clinton entered the 2008 Presidential Race she asked America to join her in a conversation, a conversation that began 160 years ago in Seneca Falls, New York.  Today we ask you to continue that conversation.  On Saturday July 19th, 2008 we ask you don your Hillary gear and gather together with your friends, your neighbors, your community, your country.  We ask you to look at yourselves, look at your nation, look at your world, and take up the path that Hillary laid before us in Beijing.  Convene in your homes, or in a public place.  Read the Declaration of Sentiments.  And read and sign a new declaration; a declaration that reaffirms the original Declaration of Sentiments, and issues a new call to embrace women’s rights as human rights; that demands that the rights of all people be protected and upheld.

You will find event details, and copies of both declarations at http://www.seneca160.us/

Join us in Seneca Falls.  Celebrate the anniversary of Seneca Falls.  Celebrate Hillary.  Come join the conversation.


Women under Carriages, under Street Cars, and under Buses

Abigail AdamsIf particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation.”

Important anniversaries are on us. This quote by the second first lady of the United States, Abigail Adams,  is as fresh and pertinent as it was when  she penned this in a letter to her husband in 1776.

From the birth of this country down to present day, women are the forgotten citizens. When they assert their rights, some war, some other movement, a disease, some other man or even the rights of proto-humans are placed before them and many just fall in.  We take care of our gay brothers suffering from aids while the last few states fail to ratify the ERA.  We support the abolition movement to free and give rights to Black Americans and votes to black men while we’re considered property way into the 1970s and cannot achieve the vote until 1920.  We march.  We do all the behind the scene work and organizing.  Then, when we ask for the vote, for our place in governing, for our right to lead, we are told that would be expedient to larger movements.  This is true of black civil rights movements, labor movements, peace movements or antiwar movements, and the founding of our nation and so ad infinitum.

We are not only approaching our annual celebration of Independence Day.  We have come upon the 160th anniversary of the Seneca Falls Convention.  The women who met during that July suggested this addition to the Declaration of Independence and penned their own tome the Declaration of Sentiments.

It was signed by a number of women leaders  including Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott. The first women’s rights conference in the United States Convention was held in Seneca Falls, New York on July 19 and 20, 1848.  Few will be celebrating this historic gathering  or probably even know of it.   One hundred and sixty years after the convention, the equality that Elizabeth Cady Stanton demands still eludes us.Susan B Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton

“The eloquent Frederick Douglass, a former slave and now editor of the Rochester North Star, however, swayed the gathering into agreeing to the resolution. At the closing session, Lucretia Mott won approval of a final resolve “for the overthrowing of the monopoly of the pulpit, and for the securing to woman equal participation with men in the various trades, professions and commerce.”

Source:  http://www.npg.si.edu/col/seneca/senfalls1.htm

This is the same Frederick Douglass who later threw women under the carriage for Black male suffrage.  In 1869, an amendment was proposed to Congress that guarantees “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”

Douglass told women to wait since it was easier to get the proposed amendment through congress if it guaranteed black males the right to vote, but not women.  This is exactly what happened.  Women had to wait.

For over two centuries, American women had few civil or political rights. Wives had to do what they were told by their husband. Until 1884, a wife was officially listed as one of her husband’s possessions. Women stayed slaves for years after the emancipation proclamation was signed.

When I was at university, I noticed this strange pattern.  Every time women say it is our turn to be recognized for all this work and we  deserve equal pay, equal rights, and equal respect,  men change the subject and put some other movement in between us.  If you look through history,  many women’s rights movements have been cast aside for peace movements or labor movements and later for civil rights movements that basically favored the rights of gay men or black men.

When asked what the role of women was in the Black Panther Movement, the answer was:  “The only role for women in this movement is horizontal.”  This continual divide and conquer strategy has left us waiting at bus stops for buses that we are later thrown under.  Much of the impetus of the women’s movement in the 70s was distilled to civil rights for gays after Stonewall and the Aids crisis.  Gay bashing and Aids struck gay men hard but much of the work and nursing was done by lesbians who abandoned the fight for the ERA and protection of the sanctity of women’s individuality as the religious right’s attempts to water down Roe v. Wade increased the humanity of proto-human life while decreasing that of breathing, living women.

The odd thing is that none of these movements are bad causes.  The development of a democratic nation, peace, abolition, Aids research, or suffrage for black men all have merit.  The fact that these are ALL good causes is not what bothers me.  The larger point to me is that these movements sprung up during active women’s rights movements and suddenly took precedence.

Senator Shirley Chisholm has always been one of my personal heroines and clearly recognized that women’s rights were not a priority for this nation.  She was always quick to note that she had experienced more sexism in her life than racism.   Please read what this great champion of women’s rights said as she fought for passage of the ERA.

Mr. Speaker, House Joint Resolution 264, before us today, which provides for equality under the law for both men and women, represents one of the most clear-cut opportunities we are likely to have to declare our faith in the principles that shaped our Constitution. It provides a legal basis for attack on the most subtle, most pervasive, and most institutionalized form of prejudice that exists. Discrimination against women, solely on the basis of their sex, is so widespread that is seems to many persons normal, natural and right.

Legal expression of prejudice on the grounds of religious or political belief has become a minor problem in our society. Prejudice on the basis of race is, at least, under systematic attack. There is reason for optimism that it will start to die with the present, older generation. It is time we act to assure full equality of opportunity to those citizens who, although in a majority, suffer the restrictions that are commonly imposed on minorities, to women.

Source: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/shirleychisholmequalrights.htm

Whenever women make progress, men step in with some other distraction and create disunity.  I see this same pattern today in the Democratic Party ONE HUNDRED and SIXTY years after the Seneca Falls Convention and well over TWO HUNDRED years after Abigail Adams.

Women, please stop and think about this before you donate your time to peace movements, misc. civil rights movements, ANY kind of movement.  We are the work horses of all of these movements, yet how many of these movements turn around and provide us ANYTHING  but lip service?  Think of the DNC, what have they done recently to stop the hemorrhage of reproductive rights?  support equal pay laws?  stop SEXIST attacks on women candidates?  Which women in this system (yes, YOU Nancy Pelosi, yes, You Candy Crowely, yes, you Cindy Sheehan, yes, you Donna Brazille, yes YOU, Governor Sibilius, yes YOU Senator Mary Landrieu, yes you Secretary of State Rice,yes, YOU Gloria Borger, …) will willingly sell out their own sex to be acceptable to the boys and get recognition in a movement or a profession not of our own design whose rules are set up so that we ultimately fail.

Just THINK ABOUT IT when you celebrate this Fourth of July.   Look at your daughters, your mothers, your grandmothers, your granddaughters, and the women around you and THINK about it.  What movement did I join that stopped me from asking for basic human and democratic rights for women?  Think about what happened to Hillary Clinton this primary season and ASK yourselves will you compromise YET again?

How much is that compromise worth to you?