Feminism is an umbrella term that demands very little. While academics can debate the finer points of the ideology, parse the movement into “waves,” and wrangle with MacKinnon and Dworkin, the result is a “big tent” philosophy united on the single, unoffensive, and simple point that women are entitled to the same rights and respect as men, and ought to have the same choices as men.
Choice is the operative word there. While the right tries endlessly to equate the entire philosophy with its radicals - we’ve all heard from conservative pundits that, apparently, ”feminists hate stay-at-home moms” - feminism doesn’t require that women do anything with their lives, other than what they want. And that’s the beauty of it. One can be a feminist lawyer, a feminist soldier, a femimist stay-at-home mom, or even a feminist man. It’s all about respect, and the freedom to choose.
A freedom that, in whatever form it takes, John McCain opposes (kudos to Judith Warner). McCain’s idea of women is one who has no choice but to get pregnant (no birth control), stay pregnant (no abortion), and, dare she work, get paid less (no equal pay). Make no mistake: John McCain will do no favor for women.
Stumble It!
13 responses so far ↓
1 Progressive Conservative // Jul 18, 2008 at 4:11 pm
I don’t see any problem with the complaints she lists other than access to birth control.
2 Ames // Jul 18, 2008 at 4:12 pm
You mean you agree or disagree with those complaints?
3 Progressive Conservative // Jul 18, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Sorry - I should have been more clear. I disagree with those complaints.
4 Ames // Jul 18, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Even the equal pay one?
5 Progressive Conservative // Jul 19, 2008 at 12:48 am
No - because he’s right that the law as it was written would have lead to countless frivolous lawsuits.
6 Ames // Jul 19, 2008 at 1:08 am
First, as a future lawyer, there’s no such thing as a frivolous lawsuit :-).
Actually, quite the opposite. There are a lot of frivolous lawsuits. But I’ve seen more filed by corporations against corporations than I have individual plaintiffs vs. their ex-employers. If you’re worried about the economy of the legal system, look at the endless motion practice in corporate America. Sure, it keeps me employed, and doing work I enjoy, but I don’t kid myself by thinking that it’s an efficient way to do business. Let’s point the finger of judicial waste at the parties who don’t need the legal system, first.
And second, let’s confront the personal barriers to suing. People *don’t* sue as much as they’re said to. There’s a huge time and emotional investment in filing a personal lawsuit, and it’s a very expensive proposition. Discrimination is underreported and under-prosecuted, and most employment disputes either settle before going to court or are arbitrated by governmental organizations like the EEOC, to minimize transaction costs and incentivize aggrieved parties to sue when their rights are infringed. Especially because the Bush administration shunted resources away from fighting sex/race discrim to fight phony religious discrimination (”I didn’t get a big enough tax break!” cry me a river…), we should be worrying about the people who DON’T enforce their rights, not concerning ourselves that too many people ARE.
7 Progressive Conservative // Jul 19, 2008 at 11:41 am
If this law goes into effect there would eventually be an institutionalized form of redress which would make it easier and easier to begin a complaint and on the flip side require a mountain of work for the company to defend itself, mostly against cases that would prve to be fruitless for the accuser.
8 Ames // Jul 19, 2008 at 2:16 pm
I have to disagree, again: the belief that people sue at the drop of a hat if procedural obstacles are removed oversimplifies the psychology of law, and assumes bad faith on the part of plaintiffs, while ignoring the potential for bad faith on the part of defendants in opposing the removal of procedural obstacles.
9 Progressive Conservative // Jul 19, 2008 at 3:51 pm
I guess i just don’t feel like this problem is pervasive enough to justify the types of measures that they were seeking to put in place.
10 didionsmommy // Jul 19, 2008 at 4:09 pm
There are a lot of frivolous lawsuits. But I’ve seen more filed by corporations against corporations than I have individual plaintiffs vs. their ex-employers. If you’re worried about the economy of the legal system, look at the endless motion practice in corporate America.
totally! better get the mantra down …
“bill those hours … bill those hours … bill those hours …”
***
p.c. … the world your republican agenda wants to construct is awfully constraining … especially for women … we can’t have sex … we can’t have abortions … we can’t have a shot in the courts over equal pay …
what’s a girl to do in a republican’s brave new world?
11 didionsmommy // Jul 19, 2008 at 6:09 pm
ames … your noting mackinnon and dworkin stirred the old cobwebs in my head … my first thought was, “they’re still at it?” … then i remember learning about them in college and being a young woman and trying to figure out where i fit in the big scheme of things …
of course, i had to go digging through my bookshelves … this was a very interesting book …
http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Exposed-Sexuality-Pornography-Debate/dp/0813519381/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216504412&sr=8-1
got me thinking about the grayness that is sexuality … is there an objective human sexuality … can it be separated from culture … am i offended by pornography … is there something wrong with me if i am … is there something more wrong with me if i’m not …
yes … the macK/dworkin stuff and separating women into waves gets a little heady and esoteric, which i think is a grave tactical error by feminist academics … that said, i hope — like warner — that the average chick-on-the-street isn’t lulled into complacency this election year …
12 Progressive Conservative // Jul 20, 2008 at 10:01 am
p.c. … the world your republican agenda wants to construct is awfully constraining … especially for women … we can’t have sex … we can’t have abortions … we can’t have a shot in the courts over equal pay …
what’s a girl to do in a republican’s brave new world?
You all are welcome to all the sex you’d like. I just want you to be responsible about it and not use abortion to fix mistakes.
I have worked for a lot of companies in my 18-year working life and I never saw any of them that were able to give un-equal pay due to internal pay structures. I think the easier thing is to pass a couple simple regulations through the labor dept and it will sort itself out.
13 Hillary PUMAs - Handmaidens of John McCain, or Weaponized Disappointment? // Aug 13, 2008 at 11:51 am
[...] every issue, borders on the self-defeatist, despite any grudge you may hold. McCain, after all, is the height of anti-feminism, and no departure from the Republican Party’s traditional platform of the subordination of [...]
Leave a Comment