California to require abortion medication at public colleges

https://wsbt.com/news/health/california-to-require-abortion-medication-at-public-colleges-1

After reading My Fight for Birth Control by Margaret Sanger paired with a class blog post alluding to its themes, I was encouraged to see the above article stating that as of last Friday, California will require abortion medication on 34 public college campuses by 2023. The procedure would be eligible to women less than 10 weeks pregnant, and consists of taking two pills spread across a few days. I think that college students are at an incredibly vulnerable age group, and whilst there is a negative stigma about getting pregnant whilst still enrolled in university, that does not change the fact that this still inevitably happens and is not always planned. It provides college students access to affordable and convenient reproductive health care of their choosing, and ensures they are able to undergo an abortion- an important protected right- if they choose to do so. On the other hand, Maria Jose Fernandez, a legislative advocate for the California Catholic Conference, claims that this law is "trying to limit the alternatives for women" by focusing solely on women wishing to terminate a life and in turn is failing to provide help to those wanting to continue on with their pregnancy. What do you think? Is this law a progressive step to a safer, more fair society in which youthful women will be subject to the reproductive rights they deserve, or is this an all-too-controversial law tilting too heavily towards the "pro-choice" side of a never-ending debate?

Overlooked No More: Georgia Gilmore, Who Fed and Funded the Montgomery Bus Boycott

Gilmore started the Club From Nowhere, a clandestine group that prepared and sold meals to raise money for the 381-day resistance action.  (from the New York Times)

Women: A Century of Change

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2019/11/

As Professor Selig discussed in class, the century mark of the 19th Amendment is approaching quickly and with it, media coverage and commentary. National Geographic's "Women: A Century of Change" is one of the first collections of dedicated coverage to the centennial and the years leading up to it that I've noticed in a major news source. I particularly enjoyed the Q&A with Christine Lagarde, who spoke at CMC a few commencements ago. Take a look and would love to hear more thoughts / reactions!

Women & the Media

In Tuesday’s Democratic debate, CNN commentators asked the democratic candidates what they thought of Ellen DeGeneres and George W. Bush's relationship and if they had any impactful/ interesting friendships that would surprise voters. Two candidates answered the question. It wasn’t until after the debate was over that the question received some backlash, as many people questioned its importance in comparison to other pressing issues.

This got me thinking... would the same question be asked if former President Bush had gone to the game with another man who also held different political beliefs than him? Would this engagement be dismissed? I would like to believe it wouldn't, but I think because Ellen is a famous woman (loved by many) that it is easy to create drama about her public and private life. Women are easy targets for these kinds of attacks. I have attached some videos. Let me know what you think!


https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/466010-cnn-catches-heat-for-asking-candidates-about-ellen-bush-friendship-at

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZFQ5anyMmE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3BN5b16x0

Fashion for Women in Politics

Going back to the appearance of women in politics, and the scathing gaze that is directed at their superficial composition, this article highlights the various ways in which women in politics around the world use fashion as a way of regaining control of their bodies, their identities, and the way they want to be perceived by the public. It's frustrating that such a paradox exists; women need to pick their outfits intentionally in order to communicate their earnestness. But this intentionality allows critics to make judgments on their motives in politics (i.e. how they dress indicates their political intentions). Women must not look too feminine, but also not overly masculine, for that is forcing her into an image she is not. I wonder how much of this is also simply the nature of women's fashion versus men's; there is generally a wider array of style available to women. Regardless, I think the article's hopeful glance into the future of politics offers us another way to upend what has already been upended: "when it is not a matter of a tradeoff between patriarchy and ambition, the wardrobe choice of a woman in politics can be an asset. When Ocasio-Cortez wore big gold hoops to President Donald Trump's State of the Union address, she tweeted that it was so that "next time when someone tells Bronx girls to take off their hoops, they can just say they're dressing like a congresswoman." When Sudanese anti-government protestor Alaa Salah wore the traditional toub to her singing protests, she channeled the Nubian warrior queens who led armies into battle."

Helen Keller's Forgotten Radicalism

"[Helen Keller] is most often remembered for proving that people with disabilities can achieve success and live independently. But to frame her life as an up-by-the-bootstraps tale, in which sheer optimism and perseverance solve the personal challenge of disability, is to miss a large portion of what Keller fought for." 

As a refresher, we talked about how the narratives of many historical figures can be simplified and packaged in a way that is easy to digest or tell. Helen Keller's story was one of them. We remember her as the blind-deaf mute who overcame her adversity through educational curricula, but have failed to hear some of the  more radical accounts of her achievements and engagement: 

(1) Joining the Socialist Party (1909),
(2) Demanding "revolution rather than reform," 
(3) Becoming a target for FBI surveillance, 

and many more found here.  

I liken it to the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. whose full story and sentiments around his "life's missional goals" are seldom told. It's interesting to see how we document history and what we deem to be important for future audiences, especially reading Freedom's Daughters, and pulling back the curtains on lesser told stories. 

"Equality State" falls behind in electing women to office

A recent article that came out highlighted Wyoming, the first state to grant women the right to vote, as now a state that “ranks 26^th in the nation for gender parity in elected office – good enough for a ‘D’ grade,” describes the decline in female representation in office. The article talks about the significance of have a female-majority legislature, such as in Nevada, where bills passed “included tougher penalties for domestic violence, permanent funding for rape kit testing and a sexual assault survivor’s bill of rights, along with a line in the budget to assist in paying for family-planning services.” It seems have a greater “gender balance” creates opportunity for issues that have traditionally been undermined the attention and gravity it deserves. Obviously, having a more diverse pool in any organization will foster more holistic and critical thinking – deviation from a kind of group-think. But I wonder why it is that the representation of women has decreased in Wyoming; is this just the trend in a region that has (for the longest compared to other states) advocated for women’s voting right – that because there isn’t as much of a conscious stigma against women running for office, there is less pressure for women to do so at all?

North Dakota's Policy on Abortions

The HuffPost article titled, "Judge Blocks North Dakota’s Medication Abortion Reversal Law," talks about an abortion law that was struck down because of its invasive nature. The law itself would require doctors to sponsor an untested procedure to "reverse" a medicated abortion. Not only this, but as soon as doctors recommend the untested procedure, they would be required to tell their patients that "time is of the essence." Considering the fact that women would be subjected to this kind of biased language in a critical moment is shocking to see. It's shocking to see because doctors would be required by law to impose a view, that they may not even support, on indecisive women. Because this law would be a violation of the 1st amendment but also a violation of privacy, the law was ultimately taken to court and shut down. Unfortunately, there are still similar unscathed laws in place. For example, the article also mentions a similar law that requires doctors to warn their patients that "abortion terminates 'the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.'"

While reading the article I couldn't help but feel a sense of deja vu since I kept thinking back to Margaret Sanger’s “My Fight for Birth Control." The first time I read Sangers' article, I was astounded to see the state meddling in personal matters and in very particular ways like limiting the content doctors could discuss with their patients. After reading The HuffPost article, I'm even more astounded that it's still happening. Why is this still a thing? Why isn't there more coverage on this issue? 

Article Link

Women & Organizing

https://www.wsj.com/articles/dont-ask-me-to-do-office-housework-11570959002?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=15

When discussing the role of women and women leadership in the Civil Rights Movement in class yesterday, it reminded me of this WSJ article I read over the weekend about women's roles in the office. Although it is not the most exact comparison, I think there is something to be said regarding the nature of roles that women are both given and expected to take on in organized situations. Just as women's crucial contributions to March on Washington were not immediately recognized because they weren't as saliently noticeable to onlookers on the day-of, characterizing the roles that women play in the background to make the march as successful as it was is similar to how women are often those who take on background roles in offices that make corporate culture what it is. I've never personally experienced this (I've also never been in the position in an office to feel this) but it's something I think I want to keep in mind moving into the type of work I want to do post-grad and in what kind of corporate culture I want to be in.

Double Standards (Also HBD AOC)

I came across breaking news this past weekend: "Self-declared socialist AOC splurges on high-dollar hairdo." I was disappointed, but not surprised to find the media covering a $300 haircut rather the poor humanitarian conditions that people are facing at the border and in the US more generally.

Despite, my personal opinion, I think the article examines the double standards female politicians face regarding physical appearance. As a woman in the office, you are expected to look your best for the public eye, yet these actions do not save you from public criticism. People do not go out of their way to investigate how much money male politicians spend on their physical appearance because it does not matter, nor should it matter.

I liked AOC's response to the backlash of her haircut by bringing the conversation back to important political issues. She did not feed into this poor political tactic. A tactic that is my opinion is overrated. Articles like these me wonder if/when double standards will come to an end? What actions will it take to stop people from using a woman's physical appearance to discredit their intelligence or actions?

https://nypost.com/2019/10/11/did-aoc-spend-too-much-on-a-haircut-nyc-women-reveal-what-they-pay-at-the-salon/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2019/10/11/backlash-over-ocasio-cortezs-haircut-shows-women-cant-win-when-it-comes-their-appearance-experts-say/

Susana Martinez for Trump 2020

In light of our conversation today, I was curious to learn more about what Susana Martinez has been doing since the conclusion of her tenure as Governor of New Mexico. In this recent article from September of the year, she spoke out in support of Trump's 2020 campaign for re-election, stating that "It’s very clear to me that the president can win New Mexico but he’s got to go places where Republicans usually don’t go". She seems to support Trump and his strict stance on border control, and cites her own experiences that she discussed in class about traveling to more rural New Mexico cities and garnering democratic support for Republican Legislation. To me this was particularly interesting and an example of her potentially treating the CMC audience as potential voters, as this recent statement was not something she mentioned in either our class discussion or the evening Ath talk.

Article here: https://www.apnews.com/c9b0a3dd1696419dbcb627d21fa86c68

Moms are Fighting to Use Campaign Funds for Childcare

I came across the The HuffPost article titled "Moms are Fighting to Use Campaign Funds for Childcare" and realized I've never considered challenges women face due to being mothers. The article dives into the question of whether or not women should be allowed to use campaign funds for childcare services. The article mentions that there have already been accounts of women who have received permission to allocate their campaign money for the services. While some are open to the idea of providing mothers in politics support in this aspect, many others are against it. An opposer made the comment that allowing women to use campaign money for child services was the equivalent of using campaign money to board a dog overnight.

Given the history of men in politics, it makes sense for people to initially be against the idea. Men don't usually struggle with trying to find babysitters, let alone worry about being able to afford one. Because politics have long been dominated by men, the public has not had enough time to witness the cost associated with being a mother in federal affairs. As stated in the article, mothers are chased away from the political sphere due to the strenuous work hours, countless traveling, and inability to live a life outside the public eye. The fact that both men and women have to face these harsh realities of politics, yet women have to encounter them in addition to worrying about running a household, shows that the playing field isn't equal to all contenders of the political world. Feel free to add your reaction or take a side on the issue at hand.
Article Link

Women's suffrage event in Wyoming sold out in 12 hours

https://thesheridanpress.com/113810/womens-suffrage-event-at-the-brinton-sold-out-in-12-hours/

On December 10th, there will be a Woman's Suffrage Event presented by The Sheridan Press and hosted by The Brinton Museum (Sheridan Country, WY) celebrating the 150th anniversary of women's suffrage in Wyoming. Tickets to this celebration sold out within 12 hours of its releasing!

As we are finishing off the topic of the women's suffrage movement, I thought it'd be interesting to remember how this began in the United States, since Wyoming was the state to first pass the law giving women the right to vote and hold office on December 10th, 1869: over 50 years before the 19th Amendment was ratified. This event will be free and inclusive, allowing for great celebration of this momental event through exhibits, a documentary screening and various inspiring women across the state coming in as guests of honour. Cheers to women's suffrage!

League of Women Voters

This summer I worked on a city council campaign and was responsible for filling out candidate questionnaires from various groups. I was able to find the questionnaire I filled out for the League of Women Voters, and I was surprised that none of questions addressed what we think of as being "women's issues." This seems to reflect what Weiss said at the end of her book about the League serving as a nonpartisan organization focused voter engagement and education rather than serving as a group that prepared women to become politicians. While the League serves an important role in helping voters understand candidates' issue positions, it seems like the focus on informed voting leaves women in the position of responding to policy rather than shaping it themselves.

In case anyone is curious, these are the questions on the League of Women Voters questionnaire for Seattle City Council: What experiences have you had that qualify you for this position? How would you describe your vision for your city? What are the obstacles in the path of achieving your vision? What do you think is your city/town's role in dealing with issues surrounding the environment? What are the issues surrounding your city/town's infrastructure? How do you think your city/town could best respond to homelessness? How do you think your city/town should approach legal and illegal immigration issues? How would you propose the council communicate with the citizens of your city or town?

Women don’t step back from work because they have rich husbands, she said. They have rich husbands because they step back from work.

Women don’t step back from work because they have rich husbands, she said. They have rich husbands because they step back from work.

I came across this article, "Women Did Everything Right. Then Work Got ‘Greedy.’" in the New York Times this past summer. Our discussion last Wednesday on the ERA reminded me about the piece. The author argues that overworking, or the expectation to work longer hours in more lucrative fields, has created a new kind of gender gap. The author explained that men and women out of MBA and JD programs have similar jobs but that decades later women earn less. This is not caused by a traditional pay gap but by the fact that women work less hours. Work has essentially become too demanding for "dual-earner power couples" to both dedicate the same hours. I want to highlight some interesting quotes:

“The fundamental problem all along is that someone has to take care of the children,” said Till von Wachter, an economist at the University of California, Los Angeles. “What’s changing here is the assortative mating piece. These women have made all these skills and investments and are not fully reaping those returns.”

“Because of rising inequality, if you put in the extra hours, if you’re around for the Sunday evening discussion, you’ll get a lot more,” said Claudia Goldin, an economist at Harvard who is writing a book on the topic. To maximize the family’s income but still keep the children alive, it’s logical for one parent to take an intensive job and the other to take a less demanding one, she said. “It just so happens that in most couples, if there’s a woman and a man, the woman takes the back seat.”

I'm not sure what to think of this article, but I have a lot of friends who have parents that met at Ivy League universities. More often than not, their mother eventually stepped away from work to raise the children, even though both sexes were equally educated. Some returned to a less lucrative job after their children went to college. I think this gives us all a lot to think about.

Jane Addams

Just to give a brief recap on Jane Addams, she was the first American woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize and she was well known for her social work and pacifism. She founded the first settlement in the United States, the Hull House, which served to provide services for immigrants and underprivileged people in Chicago. She focused her efforts on providing relief and support for those in need, as well as on spreading her message of pacifism. She helped found many other organizations, such as the NAACP and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. If you want to read more, here are two links: Nobel Peace Prize Hull House

NYC's "City of Women" Map

https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019/10/04/new-york-city-map-of-women?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_term=nprnews&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr

Check out this 5 minute audio clip from WBUR! In 2016, a geographer created an alternate map of the New York City subway system where each stop was named after an influential woman in American history. Whether we realize it or not, so many of our cultural landmarks are centered around men. This map is a simple way of re-inerting women's voices and contributions into our everyday lives. 

Coming across this article reminded me about our conversations in class about representation in history. Why have we learned certain things about American history and not others? Who or what voices are included or excluded in this narrative?