Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Women's Rights’ Category

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

Let’s be clear, women in the US are still not equal citizens.

Regarding health care, the very fact that women were mentioned by line item in the Affordable Care Act so often shows that without these inclusions women would continue to receive a standard of care unequal to that of men.  Because the Equal Rights Amendment is yet to be passed, there is no single standard of equality by which to judge and assure fair treatment.

Without the ERA, we chose instead to present the same face of discrimination to the world, as Iran, Somalia, and Afghanistan. Under Bush, even with Biden as Chair of the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and Obama, as a Committee member, CEDAW languished, as it has, since 1979.

Even under a Democratic presidency CEDAW still slumbers.

These two failures are that of Congress, because they have never made it to presidential signature. Nor have they ever come under judicial review.

Though it is hard to imagine any Democrat elected president would have vetoed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and many of us were upset that it was Obama, amid much fanfare, rather than Clinton, who was able to sign it, the fact is that the Bill was enacted.

The others, the Fair Pay Act, and Fairness Paycheck Act did not pass Congress. Again, since women are not equal citizens under a single standard, a multitude of bits of bills, each striving for a little slice of fairness, is currently the only way to achieve eventual parity.

As such, these are also failures of Congress. There is only one way to improve this condition. It entails an active defense and offence; but it first it requires an ownership of who we are.

Many of us are uneasy about the idea of defining ourselves. We may think it is too constricting or outdated. Some of us remember a time when using the term seemed a little too “whitebread” and did not correctly articulate the needs of women of color. I believe that Michelle Obama may have partly felt this way when asked if she was part of our group and she demurred. Some of us are still learning and believe that if we just try hard enough, wear the right clothes or behave, things will turn out all right.

Gaining equality is messy, sometimes dirty and smelly, often loud, frightening and even violent. Above all it is a process, rather than a one-time goal. It is a matter of choices.  In the politics of women it is usually a matter of choosing the better of two, not so good choices. Pulling historical context forward to the present helps the process.

In the debate conducted on Oct. 16th President Obama said this:

“In my health care bill, I said insurance companies need to provide contraceptive coverage to everybody who is insured, because this is not just a — a health issue; it’s an economic issue for women. It makes a difference. This is money out of that family’s pocket.

Governor Romney not only opposed it; he suggested that, in fact, employers should be able to make the decision as to whether or not a woman gets contraception through her insurance coverage. That’s not the kind of advocacy that women need. When Governor Romney says that we should eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood, there are millions of women all across the country who rely on Planned Parenthood for not just contraceptive care. They rely on it for mammograms, for cervical cancer screenings. That’s a pocketbook issue for women and families all across the country.

And it makes a difference in terms of how well and effectively women are able to work. When we talk about child care and the credits that we’re providing, that makes a difference in terms of whether they can go out there and earn a living for their family. These are not just women’s issues. These are family issues. These are economic issues. And one of the things that makes us grow as an economy is when everybody participates and women are getting the same fair deal as men are.”

Now I don’t like the Affordable Care Act because I think it should have been a single payer system, rather than one based on the profits of insurance companies. Additionally, it has vulnerabilities for women because they are incorporated by line items that can be modified by a conservative Congress.

However, that does not take away from President Obama’s comments. The apparent groking of his SOS Clinton, (Women’s rights are human rights!) indicates the theme of Obama’s presidency toward women’s issues.

This is feminism.

Where the presidency has made successful inroads, to date, is outside of Congressional gridlock and misogyny.  The Executive Branch has made a series of proclamations and Orders that advance the cause of women and girls, and therefore, humanity. For example, in 2009 he signed an Executive Order establishing the Council on Women and Girls.

A look the website for the Council shows that from that beginning has flowed a series of ideas, forums and actions that are enlarging the concept of women in government, including “The Equal Futures Partnership and United States Commitments to Expand Women’s Political and Economic Participation” (STEM) that was created this month.

This concerted Executive Branch effort has been seen elsewhere in our dealings internationally through the UN and the State Department.

These efforts unfortunately, are ephemeral. They could change with new players in the Executive Branch of a second Obama administration, or they could be actually snuffed by one of Romney’s construction.

What are WE  going to do?

Read Full Post »

From the DOS:

International Day of the Girl: To Give Girls Everywhere What We Want for Our Own Daughters | U.S. Department of State Blog.

International Day of the Girl: To Give Girls Everywhere What We Want for Our Own Daughters

POSTED BY MELANNE VERVEER / OCTOBER 11, 2012

Two Indian girls play on a street on International Day of the Girl Child in Hyderabad, India, October 11, 2012. [AP Photo]

Melanne Verveer serves as Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues.

As the world comes together to mark the first-ever International Day of the Girl on October 11, we are filled with hope, but also a sense of urgency. Just this week, a masked Pakistani Taliban militant attempted to assassinate Malala Yousufzai — a 14 year-old Pakistani schoolgirl — on her school bus simply for going to school and speaking up for her right and the right of girls everywhere to get an education. This barbaric act reminds us all too painfully that in far too many places, some still don’t value girls and want to ignore their fundamental rights as human beings. What is so inspiring about Malala’s story is the outpouring of support she has received from every level of her government and ours, and from Pakistanis of all walks of life. So many people from around the world have stood up to say that she is like their own daughter.

That flood of support for Malala gives us great hope, but there is still so much work to do. While girls have made great progress in the last decade, research has shown that in many parts of the world, girls are still less likely than boys to be enrolled in school, especially secondary school. They have less access to medical care, are more likely to suffer from malnutrition, and are more prone to becoming victims of violence and discrimination. This is why we must redouble our efforts to ensure that governments, communities, and families work together to address deeply entrenched values that discriminate against women and girls, and improve the lives of girls worldwide so that all children can reach their God-given potential.

This week, the UN and NGO partners are using this first International Day of the Girl to galvanize commitments to end child marriage — a harmful traditional practice that robs young women of their childhood, traps them into poverty, and exposes them to health risks, early pregnancy, and gender-based violence. On October 10, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Chair of The Elders and one of the founders of Girls Not Brides: The Global Partnership to End Child Marriage, Executive Director of UNFPA Dr. Babatunde Osotimehin, many private sector and non-profit partners and I joined Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at the Department of State as she announced several new public and private commitments to end child marriage and promoting girls’ education.

Child marriage is a threat to the fundamental human rights of girls, and to the health of communities. Ten million girls every year become child brides. One in seven girls in the developing world marries before she turns 15. These young girls are forced into motherhood before their bodies are ready, and too many die giving birth as a result. 

We know that education is one of the single best ways to shield girls from early marriage. Studies show that girls with secondary schooling are up to six times less likely to marry as children when compared to girls who have little or no education. Adolescent girls who stay in school are more likely to delay marriage and childbirth, are less vulnerable to HIV/AIDs, and will enjoy a greater quality of life. They are more likely to earn better incomes, have fewer and healthier children, and participate in civic and political processes. Studies have found that child marriage often coexists with other poor reproductive health practices and abuses, including female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C), cross-generational sex (spousal age gaps), gender-based violence, a higher risk of contracting HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections, and obstetric fistula and uterine prolapse, both highly stigmatized conditions brought on as a result of prolonged labor. Keeping girls in school, especially enabling them to complete secondary school, is essential to global efforts to end child marriage.

The United States is proud to be working in partnership with governments, the private sector, and civil society. Through the new Empowering Adolescent Girls to Lead through Education initiative (EAGLE), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) are working together to ensure thousands of adolescent girls in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) make successful transitions to secondary school. A $15 million initiative, EAGLE will tackle many of the barriers that keep girls from continuing post-primary education, such as cost and school safety, and will emphasize leadership training for girls. Since well-trained teachers are essential to girls’ success in school, the Department of State will provide teachers who come to the United States for educational exchange programs courses to strengthen their ability to recognize and address the unique challenges girls are confronted with in the classroom. We will also invite educators from around the world to come to the United States to research and find ways to improve girls’ education in their home countries. And beginning this fall, every one of the thousands of Peace Corps volunteers sent to work in underprivileged schools around the world will have training in gender and education. Finally, USAID is working with the Ministry of Women and Children Affairs in Bangladesh to test approaches based on health care, education, and legal research, and will enlist religious authorities, media, local governments and NGOs to promote community awareness and sensitization to the issue of child marriage.

The UN and private foundations are also stepping forward in meaningful and powerful ways — The UN Population Fund and the Ford, MasterCard, and MacArthur Foundations have pledged a total of $94 million to the cause of girls’ education and to addressing and preventing child marriage.

Investing in girls is not just the right thing to do, it’s the smart thing to can do. Progress for girls and women and progress for families, communities and nations go hand in hand.



Share this post with others.

Read Full Post »

These are worth reading. It was a fine eulogy for Chris Stevens, and a good inspirational speech tolling human commonalities. 

Remarks by the President to the UN General Assembly | The White House.

I had to wonder about some of the the meanings of this part, however:

[…At a time of economic challenge, the world has come together to broaden prosperity.  Through the G20, we have partnered with emerging countries to keep the world on the path of recovery.  America has pursued a development agenda that fuels growth and breaks dependency, and worked with African leaders to help them feed their nations.  New partnerships have been forged to combat corruption and promote government that is open and transparent, and new commitments have been made through the Equal Futures Partnership to ensure that women and girls can fully participate in politics and pursue opportunity.  And later today, I will discuss our efforts to combat the scourge of human trafficking….]

At least mentioned was the “Equal Futures Partnership“. Started last year, the United States with 12 other partners, businesses,  and NPO’s the Partnership intends to promote women. A fact sheet HEREdescribes what actions the US  intends to take to promote equal partnership for women in this country.

This could be important stuff.

Read Full Post »

U.S. Strategy To Prevent and Respond to Gender-Based Violence Globally | U.S. Department of State Blog.

 

Some one asked me the other day why I wasn’t more actively supporting SOS Hillary Rodham Clinton for POTUS 2012. She doesn’t have lot of time left to complete her tasks as SOS. This is a remarkable new strategy, if no other reason than as an attempt to codify a viewpoint.

Imagine trying to pass similar legislation for the the US. WE can’t even pass CEDAW.

Read Full Post »

Did girls’ petition help Candy Crowley land gig as a debate moderator?.

 

How about that!

Read Full Post »

The Feminist Majority has compiled this year’s list of threats to women’s rights.

Top Ten Historic Advances for Women Now at Risk

Link to: HerVotes

I must say that I was glad to see this list; one of the underreported elements of job loss in the public sector is how it is disproportionately affecting women. Because public service jobs were more likely subject to affirmative action requirements, a larger number of women were afforded the chance for a good job with decent benefits. Public service jobs were  representative of wages we were all supposed to be getting, but lost during Reaganomics, the loss of union influence, the BushCo push to make small business into the new poor class, and set up the slurpy with straws for Federal  money into religous non-profits 

So the loss of these jobs, forcing women back into minimum wage survival is viewed by me as the greatest attack on women’s rights in the last 50 years.

Of course all those foes had help. The unleashing of the oligarchs was part of the pincer attack.   Then came the Great Bushco push to force retirement funds into bed with corporations instead of investing in their own state. It went a long way to tear down the house.

Read Full Post »

TP reports:

[Police arrested 17 women and 14 men at a march outside of the Virginia Capitol while officers in riot gear held the hundreds of demonstrators back with shields. The crowd was protesting the Virginia General Assembly’s approval of a controversial bill on Thursday to require women to receive ultrasounds before abortions. The 31 people arrested […]/p

via Virginia Police Arrest 31 At Women’s Rights Demonstration. ]

Read Full Post »

Yesterday ThinkProgress’s Adam Peck reported that enough uproar had been created by Rush Limbaughs remarks over Sandra Fluke, that as many as 4 sponsors of Limbaugh’s show had canceled. It’s a good read.

Rush Limbaugh’s Advertisers Facing Social Media Firestorm

By Adam Peck on Mar 2, 2012 at 3:40

…So far, Sleep Number, The Sleep Train, Quicken Loans, Legal Zoom and Citrix have pulled ads from the program, and several others are considering following their lead…..

http://thinkprogress.org/media/2012/03/02/436852/rush-limbaugh-advertisers/

I especially think people who sell beds WOULD want to stay away from insulting half the US population.

Over at the CS Monitor Peter Grier asks:

Is Rush Limbaugh damaging the Republican Party?

Before Rush Limbaugh spoke up, the Republicans thought they had a winning issue on contraception in health-care plans. Now, everyone is on the same side: against Rush Limbaugh.

By Peter GrierStaff writer / March 2, 2012

…Limbaugh himself remains unapologetic for his comments. On his radio show Friday he said, “This isn’t about contraception anyway. This is about expanding the reach and power of government into your womb, if you’re a woman.”…

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/Vox-News/2012/0302/Is-Rush-Limbaugh-damaging-the-Republican-Party

Good question Peter- except I think that question was answered in 2008, when Clear Channel signed that 400 million dollar contract for Limbaugh, during the last election. You can’t undo the anger of women then, by generating more outrage.

Erick Erickson decided a flank attack to defend Limbaugh was a good idea (Think Sun Tzu) and went after Carly Fiorina.

Does Carly Fiorina Just Not Get It?

Posted by Erick Erickson (Diary)

Friday, March 2nd at 10:12AM EST

[Carly Fiorina is offended by Rush Limbaugh’s comments on Georgetown Law School student Sandra Fluke, who testified before Congress that she wants the American taxpayers to subsidize her sexual proclivities.

We should be insulted with Fluke, but Fiorina is insulted by Limbaugh.

“That language is insulting, in my opinion. It’s incendiary and most of all, it’s a distraction. It’s a distraction from what are very real and important issues,” said Fiorina on CBS’s “This Morning.”

…So of course Rush Limbaugh was being insulting. He was using it as a tool to highlight just how absurd the Democrats’ position is on this. It’s what he does and does quite well. And in the process he’s exposing a lot of media bias on the issue as people rush out (no pun intended) to make Sandra Fluke a victim of his insults and dance around precisely what is really insulting — her testimony before congress that American taxpayers should subsidize the sexual habits of Georgetown Law School students because, God forbid, they should stop having sex if they cannot afford the pills themselves.

Suddenly, an act Democrats have said for years was private and consensual, must despite that be paid for by the American taxpayers.

BONUS POINT: Why is a person who lost a U.S. Senate campaign after sucking up vast resources from Republicans donors that could have gone elsewhere somehow made the Vice Chairman of the GOP’s Senate Campaign Committee?..]

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/03/02/does-carly-fiorina-just-not-get-it/

Erickson is referring to her failed California Senate race for Barbara Boxer’s seat. If you read her interesting bio link attached to her name above, you’ll know I’m not near her political pasture. There is no doubt, however, she is qualified to be Vice Chairman of the GOP’s Senate Campaign Committee.

Money drives elections; Carly couldn’t have made the CA run if supporters weren’t willing to pay the money for her to do it. Money drives elections, yet Erickson would rather spread the misogyny and insult an important republican woman overseeing the Party’s finances, to support the Limbaugh  Hate Speech Club. Erickson’s stated opinion above that that Limbaugh WAS being deliberately insulting probably doesn’t help Limbaugh.

Carly gets it, Erick.

I’ll point out again, the Blunt bill was stupid and would have allowed unnamed and anonymous exclusions from the Affordable Care Act for any sort of “conscience” claim.

Birth control was not specifically identified  in the bill.

Contraception is for two.

If a woman wants sex with him the man has got to want it too.

Limbaugh’s hate speech is paid for, to the tune of 400 million dollars, by Clear Channel. No matter the right or left politics of it, or which political party comes out of this looking better, it’s hate speech against women, and, Sandra Fluke in particular. The man called her a “slut and round heeled”. The lawyers will have to decide if Limbaugh’s speech is also actionable.

Read Full Post »

After the announcement of Andrew Breitbart’s death, I did wonder about this and Politico has the scoop:

[Shirley Sherrod’s suit against Andrew Breitbart likely to continue

By JOSH GERSTEIN | 3/1/12 4:38 PM EST
A defamation lawsuit a former Agriculture Department employee filed against conservative journalist Andrew Breitbart is likely to continue despite Breitbart’s unexpected death on Wednesday night at age 43 …..

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/03/shirley-sherrods-suit- against-andrew-breitbart-likely-116078.html ]

Please go to their full article and read it. If all the kinks are worked out it seems likely that Breitbart’s estate and at least one co-worker will be subject to the continued court proceedings.

If you’re trying to remember who Shirley Sherrod is, I have attached a pdf of an older blog post from JohnSmart, now at:
http://johnwsmart.wordpress.com/

I liked John’s post, first because he laid out the timeline of events nicely, and because I thought he well represented the traps, pitfalls and honesty in opinion writing.

Can the the tenants of this lawsuit apply elsewhere? You lawyers out there will know, but it seems to me that one person who defames another and gets paid or promised 400 million dollars to do it ought to have made vulnerable the whole business system that allowed this defamation.

Even if he gets fired.

Even if he dies.

What are 15 million listeners supposed to think, when year after year Limbaugh and Company get away with this garbage and no one brings them to justice?

And, what about Danica?

Read Full Post »

Senator Boxer issued a press release on the defeat of the Blunt Bomb to day:

[Press Release of U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer

For Immediate Release:
March 1, 2012
Contact:
Washington D.C. Office (202) 224-3553
Boxer Statement on Senate Defeat of Blunt Amendment
Republican Measure Threatened Vital Health Services for Millions of American Women and Families
Washington, D.C. ­ U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) today issued the following statement after the Senate defeated an amendment by Senator Roy Blunt (R-MO) that would have allowed any employer or health insurance company to deny critical health care services to anyone:

³Today¹s vote is a victory for the millions of American women and families who were in danger of losing access to vital health services. It is clear that the Republican attacks on women¹s health are having ripple effects all across this country, and the fact that nearly every Republican voted for this amendment will not soon be forgotten.²

http://boxer.senate.gov/en/press/releases/030112.cfm%5D

Thank you, Senator Boxer, for your efforts. Yea, a lot of reds and a few blues voted for this mess. Maine’s Senator Snowe was the only Republican Senator to vote against it. I don’t wonder she wants to retire. As an actual Republican, it can’t have been easy for her the last four years either.

Sure enough, she just put out a statement to that effect:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/olympia-snowe-why-im-leaving-the-sena te/2012/03/01/gIQApGYZlR_story.html

There are currently 17 women in the Senate-obviously nowhere near 51% of the possible 50 seats. Snowe’s seat MUST go to a woman if only to retain the status quo. I know it’s Maine, but a little diversity wouldn’t hurt either.

Snowe herself has inferred that there is little room for a moderate in the current Senate. To break the deadlock in the Senate a Democrat or a Green in her seat would make the difference.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »