Advertisement
So, I found myself being amazed the other day when I turned on CNN and lo it seemed that a woman had been chosen to be Speaker of the House of the United States of America. Oddly, I needed to be reminded that, indeed, this was a day that 100 years ago had seemed a long way off...as indeed it turned out to be, namely that an actual woman had become Speaker of the House. But, indeed it has.
Why was I surprised to discover that I had forgotten that this was indeed a very important occassion? That is a good question. Partially, it is probably because I don't worry about whether it is possible or not...although I do fear the folks she will be up against in the Executive branch don't like it and don't care for it and probably will do everything they can to prevent Speaker Pelosi from doing the job the People want her to do. I mean it is an amazing thing, to be reminded about how important a woman becoming third inline to be President of the United States is should, say, Cheney and Bush both be impeached and convicted simultaneously. In any case, it is interesting that for many of us (or is it just me?) that this historic moment seemed to just jump out of the pages of the paper, the radio, and the TV (if we actually pay much attention to the blaring media these days) with an amazing thing happening for equality and women's rights.
Perhaps it is just not amazing enough...yet.
Why was I surprised to discover that I had forgotten that this was indeed a very important occassion? That is a good question. Partially, it is probably because I don't worry about whether it is possible or not...although I do fear the folks she will be up against in the Executive branch don't like it and don't care for it and probably will do everything they can to prevent Speaker Pelosi from doing the job the People want her to do. I mean it is an amazing thing, to be reminded about how important a woman becoming third inline to be President of the United States is should, say, Cheney and Bush both be impeached and convicted simultaneously. In any case, it is interesting that for many of us (or is it just me?) that this historic moment seemed to just jump out of the pages of the paper, the radio, and the TV (if we actually pay much attention to the blaring media these days) with an amazing thing happening for equality and women's rights.
Perhaps it is just not amazing enough...yet.
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: On the theory of being upstaged by political change
Sat, January 13, 2007 - 9:55 AMI was at the bank when I saw the news. I had mixed feelings. Yes and hurray that a woman is 3rd in line and 1st to make history as House Speaker. But tokenism has been on my mind and the thought of looks can kill came to me. It LOOKS like progress is happening, but is it? Will Ms. Pelosi make only 75cents to the dollar as compared to the men that have held the position? Tokenism is dangerous and let's the "they" make statements and assurances of equality when we all know it just ain't so. -
-
Re: On the theory of being upstaged by political change
Tue, January 16, 2007 - 10:19 AMLet's not dismiss her as a token just yet, OK? That is the greatest and fastest way to undercut her from the inside. In her acceptance speech she made it clear that this was not personal, that is was not about her, and that it was a vistory for the women of the US. I believe she's the best "man" for the job and that that is why she got it. I look forward to seeing her do the job. I don't see her as a token. Nor, for that matter, do I see Condy as a token. -
-
Re: On the theory of being upstaged by political change
Fri, January 19, 2007 - 9:43 PMGood call. It seems like Pelosi just got four and a-half veto proof bills (out of six that passed) through the House! Not bad for a start!
As for Condy, she's not a token, she's an agent of Big Oil. Oh, maybe I'm wrong about former board members of Exxon who end up being the National Security Advisor and then Secretary of State just schilling for soiled oil profits...but, heck, I leave that up to those more informed than I to decide that particular case. I hope. -
-
Re: On the theory of being upstaged by political change
Sat, January 20, 2007 - 10:19 PMI think Condy's a ruthless creature who'd sell anyone down the river for the oligarchy in the hope she'll get a piece of the pie herself while it's still hot, just like the rest of 'em, but that doesn't make her any less a woman. It just makes her a woman I disagree with.
Harry Belafonte apparently called her a house servant, along with Colin Powell, but I don't think that's fair either. Why should all Blacks be Democrats or Uncle Toms, surely some can just be straight up neo-con Republicans, just like their equally venal White colleagues? -
-
Re: On the theory of being upstaged by political change
Sun, January 28, 2007 - 9:55 AMGood reminder to be happy for Ms. Pelosi. I have had the pleasure to attend a few functions for her, and she is a powerful force and a saavy woman. I am pleased that she has earned a place as House Speaker.
It is not that I feel she is in any way unqualified or undeserving it's just that one might also consider the times we are in and the effect on the American people by assigning a woman of color to represent our war efforts and another women to lead the House. With groups like Code Pink becoming more prominent, and the Supreme Court being down 1 female, it seems odd to have a HISTORICAL FEMALE anything placed before the American people, conspiracy flipancy aside, it just feels odd, a bit Trojan Horsey. Additionally it is easy for people, especially historically "oppressed" people, such as women, to be offered demonstrations of "equality" when the reality of day to day life for that demographic is anything but (like equal pay for equal work - NY Times last month just ran an article on how the gap between male and female college graduates for equal pay at the same job with similar educations was actually WIDENING not closing. Low paying jobs were showing similar pay, which can make it SEEM as if fair wages were being offered).
I agree whole heartedly with Rachel's statement that your ethnic/racial makeup or your gender should not be expected to align with a particular world view, everyone has their own lens by which to view the world.
Harry Belafonte, who used his fame and fortune to help the black civil rights cause and was a proponent of MLK Jr., has a long history of black leadership and civil rights politics and obviously has some strong opinions around CP and CR. When one looks into the concepts surrounding the cycles of oppression as well as the potential realites of internalized oppression, well when that lens is utilized, any women who is not a feminist is a byproduct of oppression, and women who IS a feminist is a byproduct of oppression, and one not working to create scenarios of equity amongst all people, especially those historically influenced and presently reeling from those measures is just serving the slave/master dicotomy - some would say. The issues are deeper than can be imagined and if we look at all of this with a systems thinking mindset it becomes really sticky and very ugly.
Peace
-
-
Re: On the theory of being upstaged by political change
Tue, February 6, 2007 - 12:27 PMThank you Jenn. I totally agree about the sticky stuff when you take a systems view. When I take a systems view, the entire world seems irreversibly gripped by a relentless, ruthless oligarchy. In fact, on a bad day, I can believe the "reptile aliens have colonised us" theory. No kidding.
-
-
Re: On the theory of being upstaged by political change
Tue, February 6, 2007 - 12:26 PMInterestingly, this was mirrored, in a very odd way, in the Super Bowl win on Sunday where the first black coach won.
In some ways, we take for granted that women, blacks, other minorites have "rights" - we take it so forgranted that we forget how unequal we truly are in the eyes of modern america.
It's one thing to be accept that women are "in teh workforce", but for a population that makes up 49-52% of the population any given year, we make up less than 10% of ALL politicians around the country at any level, we make up less than 8% in house and senate (at least before nov's election).
we say blacks have moved into society, have money, businesses... yet in sports where they make up maybe 50-80% (total guess) of the population - what is the percentage of coaches who are black; or "brainy jobs" like QB. How many of the fans in teh stadium are black?
and ofcourse as women, we all know that in 99% of households, we both work, but it's teh chicks who are expected to do the cooking, the cleaning, shlep the kids to soccar, do the shopping, check the homework, clean teh bathroom, do the laundry, and the man gets to "Take Out the Trash" and watch "his shows" on tv.
maybe we've "come a long way baby", isn't really much more than illusion? -
-
Unsu...
Re: On the theory of being upstaged by political change
Tue, February 6, 2007 - 12:31 PMI noticed that when she changed to a green outfit and Mrs. Clinton from New York was still wearing a conservative color black that Clinton looked like she really wanted that position for herself. Of course you can't tell that just by looking at her but you can guess that if she was either going to be the speaker of the house or else just some person in New York she would rather have the better position. What is she in New York again, the Governor?
-
-
-
-
-