NOW-NYS Reporter - Summer, 1997
Most of the "chaos" in our society exists because we are in a revolution created inadvertently by women who have stopped playing the roles that the patriarchy assigned them. The answer lies not in trying to force women back into the old roles but in recognizing the "chaos" as a creative reformatting of society that will lead to new structures and new ways of doing things in a new world beyond gender.
Societal systems are disintegrating as women recognize their own strengths. They are saying, "I am a full citizen and human being and need to be treated as such." They/We may not be saying it in those words but our actions relay that message and that's what the status quo leadership is reluctant to acknowledge.
We as women are making our own decisions as fully adult humans in the same way that men have always done. And because we women are no longer willing to be second class citizens but see ourselves as first class, and because we are beginning to act on our own responsibility and in our own best interests, each woman is an integral part of this revolution.
It is happening with women who don't even realize they are part of this change. They only want a better salary, or the man out of the house, or more for their children and themselves. They only want affordable day-care, safe- legal abortion and birth control, an end to sexual harassment, an end to violence from men, and to be treated as equal human beings. By aiming for all of the above they are creating this revolution.
• Every woman who leaves a dysfunctional home is part of this revolution.
• Every woman who strives for a higher education is part of this revolution.
• Every woman who rejects abuse and violence is part of this revolution.
• Every woman who decides to be a single parent is part of this revolution.
• Every woman who wears pants so that she can jump, run, and sit as comfortably as her
brothers is part of this revolution.
• Every woman who discards those ridiculous high heels and that too short mini-skirt in
order to run ahead of or alongside a man is part of this revolution.
• Every woman who loves another woman is part of this revolution.
• Every woman who rejects legislation of her body is part of this revolution.
• Every woman who shares her life story is part of this revolution.
• Every woman who joins NOW and other women's rights activist groups is part this revolution.
The old metaphor that women don't know how to get along in organizations and groups
because we didn't play baseball or football is hogwash. We are stronger and inherently more independent than our brothers because we build our relationships independently through raising children and being daughters, mothers, wives, etc. We know how to establish independent homes and how to come together when need be. In doing so we bring that independence with us, thereby creating strong unions.
Women's independence is obvious in many ways, particularly in the way we dress. Just look at our male counterparts. They all look alike in their three piece suits, ties, tuxedos, sports teams uniforms, police/ fire-rescue/ and military-forces outfits. At any large social function one can't tell one man from the other and they all look alike because they want to! After all, they are in power. Men have a strong need to travel in herds in order gain support from one another. They find their security in their likeness to their brothers. They belong to fraternal organizations that are secret and they stop in bars with guys after work and they play all-male team sports.Women are secure in their independence and don't need to demonstrate overt signs of belonging to the pack. Even in the patriarchal prescribed uniforms of high heels and panti-hose, women venture more variety of style.
Among the most powerful cultural institutions trying to keep women in second class status are religion, politics, and business, all of which are male-dominated and unwilling to be inclusive. Men and patriarchal women clamor for "family values" based on their own sexist perspective of what "family values" are. What they are really saying is that they want women barefoot, pregnant and back in the kitchen. But women are not buying that. We have found we can be happy barefoot and pregnant as long as it's our own choice to be barefoot and pregnant and as long as we don't have to put up with egocentric abusive males. Hence we have more single mothers and more teenagemothers asserting that patriarchal laws won't prevent us from creating our own families.
We are in the middle of this revolution. It's a revolution that individual women have created acting independently. Some women are working through groups and organizations while others are affected by those groups and organizations. As women we are changing society individually because we will no longer accept the circumstances under which we are living nor accept the roles being foisted upon us.
As women we are no longer willing to work only in low-paying stereotypical fields and are no longer content to spend our lives as personal servants to men who whimsically may or may not support us, and to families who may or may not stay with us for the rest of our lives.
Most women are no longer willing to settle for minimal roles in church leadership or minimal salaries as food servers and secretaries. We have rebelled against the low status, low pay, and the "glass ceiling" over teachers, nurses, and other business professionals. We are establishing our own businesses at a great rate. At the same time we won't settle for abusive or violent men and we are increasingly choosing single parenthood. All of this flies in the face of patriarchal leaders who continue to clamor for "a return to" their "family values." When clamoring fails, patriarchies legislate. But many women are too independent to obey oppressive laws. Consequently, the patriarchy is losing control of its women, a phenomenon which threatens its very foundations.
Fear of women has always been at the heart of male domination. This fear is worthy of consideration. Since women have the power to grow life, it may be recognized that given the chance, they also have the power to take life away. Fear that they will take the lives of rapists, batterers, stalkers, child molesters, murderers, thugs, and unresponsive stay-away fathers inspires the patriarchy to deny women self-esteem, power and control. This fear also engineers the strong taboo against women arming themselves, learning self-defense, striking back at attackers, or even developing strong muscular bodies. The status-quo fears that given freedom and equality, women will realize inherent powers and act on them. In fact, women today are participating in sports and developing their bodies and minds as never before in recorded history.
As technology advances via cyberspace, women gain freedom to communicate more easily witheach other. As we tell our stories the walls are coming down and the secrets are coming out. Consequently women are supporting and encouraging each other, benefiting in higher self-esteem and self-empowerment, and increasing strength and ability to demand equality in all areas of life. As we learn to identify with each other, we also learn to understand each other and, one by one, our understanding is growing this revolution.
These past few elections have seen implosions of our patriarchal system. The pandemonium is evident in simultaneous left and right victories within the same election districts. People are no longer listening to candidates' pre-election rhetoric. Pre-election promises are no longer dictating lives, and women as a tremendous voting block, are voting in the interests of themselves and their families. The dust is flying, and what we must do now is regroup, re-evaluate our positions, become activists, and set our agenda so that when this dust settles we land with all feet on the ground, having changed society into a fairer, more egalitarian place. This will happen, almost of its own accord, when we reach a critical mass. And this is why each activist, acting both independently, and through organizations, is so important.
Scientists recognize the theory of "critical mass" which has now been observed as a phenomenonin social movements as well. A "critical mass" is the point at which a wide enough percentage ofthe population has changed to the point where the entire mass will be effected. Those in oursociety who advocate equality, social justice, and freedom from patriarchy and/or theocracy havebecome a critical mass. The temporary "chaos" we are witnessing is a result of the changescaused by the critical mass women have become and by the backlash these changes incur. It isthe result of a critical mass beginning to affect society.
Those of us who care about equality, who care about justice, and who treasure freedom must continue with the work we have been doing. By keeping up our struggles, by continuing to organize, and by speaking the truth, we are increasing the numbers of the critical mass, thereby moving forward to a world beyond patriarchy. [email protected]
Talking Back
by Marilyn Fitterman
In 1964 Shirley Chisholm won a seat in the New York State Legislature. In 1968 Chisholm became the first black woman to serve in the United States Congress; and in 1972 she was the first black woman to run for the United States Presidency.
It was in a speech shortly thereafter that Shirley Chisholm remarked “of my two “handicaps” being female put more obstacles in my path than being black.” On another occasion she said that she “always felt more discrimination being a woman than being black.”
How many ways must the vile misogyny of our culture be stated and restated until we acknowledge the injustice and reach gender equality? That question has lingered in the minds of too many women for too many years. As the innovative feminist Mary Daly wrote “Even while we struggle to escape the mindset of patriarchy it still exerts a firm hold over our consciousness.”
Whether we call it sexism or misogyny, the results are the same; for both are so universal, so deep-seated and internalized, that they are invisible because they are so normal.
What better evidence of this bias could there be than what is happening right now on web sites, in the presses, and in the media? While we see a charming, charismatic, but inexperienced black man getting a free ride to the White House, we witness, perhaps for the first time, such overt, vicious and callous treatment of a woman who dares to aspire to thepresidency. And the saddest aspect of this historic moment is that because of this-deep seated, unconsciousness, sexism, most people, including too many women, just don’t see it. They don’t see the difference in the kinds of questions that Tim Russert asks Barack Obama, as opposed to the “girly” questions he asks of Hillary Clinton.
At this time in our history, the United States is perhaps the most educated it has ever been. Therefore, this would be a good time to examine the thousands of years of internalized misogyny.
If we can examine our views of racism and sexism, even at high emotional risk, perhaps through feminism we will find and use our commonality and diversity to the advantage of humanity.
One way to make up for the injustice of thousands of years of sexism would be to elect the first women president of the United States. At least twenty-six industrialized nations have already elected women leaders and the world did not come to an end. And, at this time in our history we have one of the most qualified and experienced woman to fill this job.
Mr. Obama’s experience and education can’t hold a candle to that of Hillary Clinton, who has had the opportunity to actually live and work in the White House for eight years, and to work in the Senate for six years. Damn it, how much more should one have to know to be able to run this great nation of ours?
As educator, Dr. Eleanor Schetlin said in an article long ago: the functions of government are now primarily those that within the home are considered to be women’s work, among them: feeding the hungry, managing the budget, caring for the sick and aged, planning for the education of the young, maintaining order, controlling noise, refereeing disputes, overseeing transportation, maintaining peer and diplomatic relationships, keeping peace with neighbors, preventing disease and accidents, promoting health and safety, maintaining sanitation, occupying the unemployed, preserving resources, cleaning up and beautifying the environment. As Dr. Schetlin so succinctly surmised, “perhaps we are engulfed in pollution because there are no women in government to tell the men to take out the trash.As Shirley Chisholm asked in a 1972 speech, could it be that woman’s supposedly biologically-determined role as nurturer and homemaker is to run our national homeland? Although such gender-based stereotypes should not be perpetuated, perhaps in this instance they should be followed through to their conclusions. Logically in terms of the stereotypes, as Dr. Schetlin wrote, women should be running the government. Men have been in power since recorded history and the world is about to blow up. What betterreason than to elect Hillary Clinton the next president. And, let us not forget the words of activist and author Sonia Johnson: “They can’t do patriarchy without us.” Therefore, rather than aiding and abetting the patriarchy let’s talk back, do the right thing, and send Hillary Clinton to the White House.
[email protected]
[email protected]
Deja Vu: Race Vs Gender 1870-2008
By Marilyn Fitterman
NOW NE Regional Director &
Past President NOW-NYS
The press, the media, the pundits, everyone is saying the Democratic presidential race should not be about race vs. gender. How ridiculous is that? We look at Hillary Clinton and we see a possibility of the first woman in the white house. We look at Obama and we see the first man of color in the white house. Therefore, to say it is not about race vs. gender is to deny reality. Let’s get real, and from there it will be easier to make the right decision, which of course is to put women first in a women’s organization. We must, as women, unite.
If not for ourselves then whom are we for? If not us, who? If not now, when?
Back in the early 1820s and 30s there were numerous women fighting for and speaking up for abolition. Women saw the inhuman cruelty of slavery. Lucretia Mott, Maria Chapman, Lucy Stone, Sojourner Truth and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, to name just a few, spoke up against slavery at the very real risk of physical violence. In 1833 the American Anti-Slavery Society actually barred women from speaking. So what did women do? They started their own anti-slavery society throughout the country and even had conventions in 1837, 1838, and 1839. In 1840, when some of these women went to England to attend the International Abolition Convention, they were barred from attending and, after fighting to get in, were barred from speaking even though some were there representing an American Society of Abolitionists. It was not long after this that Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton realized that women had to unite and fight for themselves. They met to discuss a movement for equality and suffrage, and this historic meeting was the impetus for the 1848 first Women’s Rights Convention in SenacaFalls. Those women asked:
If not for ourselves then whom are we for? If not us, who? If not now, when?
In that period married women had no right to their paychecks, their children, or their property, let alone the right to vote. For a time the women’s movement and the abolition movement worked together. In fact, Frederick Douglas, a freed slave, was a frequent speaker at women’s conventions. While women were struggling to attain the vote, Douglas spoke for them and sided with them that women and Black men should have suffrage.
However in 1869, when Congress offered up the Fifteenth Amendment giving only Black men the vote, Douglas betrayed women by making the concession. Some women even agreed with Douglas that it was o.k. for Black men to leave us behind instead of holding fast for suffrage. In much the same way today, some think it is o.k. for Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, et.al. to support Obama. Back then, because of that betrayal, women had to wait another fifty years. Not until 1920 did we get the vote. That betrayal caused a split in the suffrage movement which is mirrored in today’s race vs. gender situation in the Democratic Party and in our current women’s movement.
If not for ourselves then whom are we for? If not us, who? If not now, when?
Recently, a famous TV personality declared that the United States owed more to Black men than it did to women, this being his reason for supporting Obama. I found that to be one of the most repulsive reasons for not supporting Hillary Clinton.
Women have been second class citizens since recorded history. The internalized misogyny that rears its ugly head and so insidiously creeps into our everyday lives will never end until women stick together as do other oppressed groups. Recently I was reminded that pre Roe vs. Wade women had a great uniting force in that all could be forced to complete unwanted pregnancies. I remember how women who were strangers would help and support other women to find a doctor or a back alley abortionist. Women then understood the importance and the value of joining together to help each other control their own reproductive lives. However, since Roe vs. Wade many young women don’t have that very common problem of forced pregnancy, a problem which crosses all economic and social lines. They have forgotten the importance of uniting for each other. And with the loss of this camaraderie we have apparently also lost the knowledge that forced pregnancy could return with a single US Supreme Court vote. And to get Hillary elected, we could sure use a revival in some of that old girls’ club camaraderie.
The current circumstances of race vs. gender are very much alive in spite of media denials. Just looking at the results of Super Tuesday one can see that Black communities were hands down for Obama. Meanwhile women, who are more than fifty-two percent of the population, did not do the same for their sisters. The charisma and preacher-like emotional speeches that Obama gives enrapture the younger generation. But there is very little information in the rhetoric. Were Hillary to show this same agitated style, she would be ridiculed for excessive emotion. She is caught between a rock and a hard place. If she shows emotion, as does Obama, she is vilified, as was recently demonstrated. So even though she is enormously qualified and experienced for the presidency, all that goes by the wayside when Obama enchants the youngsters with charming rhetoric that says little. If Hillary were to be “charming” she would be disparaged. Women just can’t get it right, can we?
If not for ourselves then whom are we for? If not us, who? If not now, when?
Many young women today have forgotten or do not know of the sit-ins, the hunger strikes, the marches, the tears as we lost the Equal Rights Amendment, the thousands upon thousands of women, mothers and grandmothers who died having illegal abortions. Those many young women have forgotten the women’s movement and all the gains we have made. They have abandoned us and instead have fallen for the charisma and charm of a Black male instead of the experience, dedication, and proven life’s work of a White female. Will it take losing Roe vs. Wade to get back that old camaraderie? We’ve got to realize that and ask:
If not for ourselves then whom are we for? If not us, who? If not now, when?
But, it’s not too late. It’s up to all of us who care about women’s equality to educate each and every young woman we meet, and remind her that all the freedoms she has can easily be lost if women don’t unite for full equal rights. We should remind young women that we have a long way to go because even today women are only making seventy-seven cents for every dollar a man earns. This pay inequity hits single mothers and retirement-age women. They should know that it’s about time young girls had the role model of a woman in the White House. Yep, women’s equality is very important and we’ve got a long way to go.
DAMN IT, we woman have been at the forefront of every progressive movement in this country. It’s about time we stand together for ourselves and stand together at the forefront to elect the first woman president. After all:
If not for ourselves then whom are we for? If not us, who? If not now, when?
We must unite for Hillary.
National Women's Equality Amendment
By Marilyn Fitterman
NOW Northeast Regional Director & Past President NOW-NYS
NOW-NYS Reporter - Summer 2007
ERA: Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.
In the 1970’s and early 80’s Phyllis Schlafly, backed by the right wing, organized a well financed campaign to defeat the Equal Rights Amendment see ERA text above) which fell three states short of the thirty-eight required for ratification. Schlafly scared the hell out of people by informing them that we were serious and that women really did want equal rights with men. Maybe what they were really afraid of was that men would have equal rights and responsibilities with women. But they wouldn’t dare to say that. We cannot allow the Schlaflys of the right wing to deceive the public again.
The ERA has been introduced to Congress every year since 1923. This year the amendment was re-introduced as the Women’s Equality Amendment; and it is up to us to tell our elected representatives that we will be watching their votes. If we are going to win this battle for justice, and respect for women, we’re going to need ammunition and the Women’s Equality Amendment is just that.
Many of us believe that one way to reach out to the American people is to show we, as feminists, mean what we say about having equality. For example, upon reaching the age of eighteen, all young men must register for the draft. Shouldn’t we be pointing out that equality means young women as well should also register when they reach eighteen years of age? It goes without saying that I am totally against war and the draft, however, while watching my grandson fill out the mandated registration I noticed the that women were not permitted to register. I wondered why his life was worth less to our government than that of my granddaughter? I love them equally.
Ideally we would prefer that no one ever had to register for the draft, but things being what they are, let’s keep it fair. In 1975 mandatory registration for the draft was suspended but was resumed in 1980 at which time President Carter sent to Congress a bill to include women in registration. But Congress refused this. It came up again a few years later, but as we have learned by now, Congress does not necessarily use its power to insure women’s equality. Even today, with Democrats at the helm, and with a woman as Speaker of the House, not much has changed. Therefore, it is up to us, constituents in our respective districts, to hold their feet to the fire and to demand equal justice and equal opportunities for all.
Just a few years ago the Selective Service System proposed registering women for the military draft. But agency officials acknowledged that they would have “to market the concept” of a female draft to Congress, who ultimately would have to authorize such a step. Can you imagine having to “market” a concept of including women? I was insulted when I read these words and I hope you are too.
Another recommendation to Congress was an act to provide presidential authority to register, classify, and examine women for service in the Armed Forces. If granted, the President would exercise this authority when Congress authorized conscription of men. It goes on to say that women would become part of the personnel inventory for the services to draw from. Their use would be based on the needs and missions of the services. Wow does this sound like the Handmaid’s Tale or what?
The exclusion of women was challenged in the courts; and although a lower court found that gender-based discrimination violated the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment, the Supreme Court reversed the District Court decision and upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion. I’m proud to say that the National Organization for Women filed an amicus brief supporting the lower court’s decision.
In 1992 a Presidential Commission reexamined the issue but voted to maintain the status quo. In 1994 President Clinton asked the Secretary of Defense to update its mobilization requirements and as part of the effort to review arguments for and against continuing to exclude women, now that women were being assigned to combat roles. A survey was done at that time which showed that 52% of respondents indicated women should be drafted if there were a draft. Certainly today, with public consciousness raised that 52% number would be greater.
Back to the Women’s Equality Amendment. The latest poll shows that 88% of Americans agree that we should add women to the Constitution. There really is no legal basis for this obstructionism, other than legislators’ misogyny. All of us who care about equality have a responsibility to contact our legislators to insure they vote yes when the time comes.
Elsewhere in this NOW-NYS Reporter is an informative piece about the New York State Equal Rights Amendment which, despite their similarity, does not affect the National Women’s Equality Amendment.
New York’s Governor Spitzer is a friend to women. We should let him know that when the time comes we want him to insist that our legislators grant women equal rights by voting yes for the National Women’s Equality Amendment and yes for an Equal Rights Amendment to the New York State Constitution. As Susan B. Anthony often said: “Failure is impossible!” Let’s make an honest woman of her and get it done.
