|
My great-grandmother was born when women couldn't make many of their own decisions, including voting. My grandmother had an education she never used. And my mother had to wear a skirt to high school. Every day. As I grew up and my maternal ancestral line shared their experiences with me, (1) I couldn't relate, and (2) I was eternally grateful for the fights of my foremothers and foresisters so I could make my own decisions, use my education, and wear whatever I wanted. Today, however, there is a focused effort to take choices away from women, reinforce the economic and professional glass ceiling, and although women aren't in much danger of being forced to wear skirts to high school, we aren't respected as voters, as workers, or as humans.
I grew up in Iowa, one of two states that have never elected a woman as a member of Congress or governor (the other is Mississippi). At one time we had a female chief justice of our Supreme Court, and then she was voted out after the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously agreed same-sex marriage should be legal here. She was somewhat redeemed last month when she received a John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award from Caroline Kennedy.
The so-called "so-called War on Women" leading up to the 2012 presidential election has pitted the GOP versus the Dems, pro-choicers versus. anti-choicers, birth control proponents versus the proponents of "we will control you until you give birth and then you're on your own," and the Palin-Bachmann camp versus what I always hope is the rest of us.
As the Clintons so famously said, abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. Fair enough. I would add that we shouldn't try to make an already difficult decision more painful. However, options for choice are being attacked on two fronts, first by limiting access and coverage to women's birth control, and second by being especially awful to women who do get pregnant and think they have the illusion of "choice". This great interest in the welfare of children ends as soon as the child is out of the birth canal. Then, rather than control the mother, they can place blame on her, cut funding to Planned Parenthood (her doctor) child care programs (her child care), and make her feel bad about a plethora of other life decisions: Breast or bottle? Stay at home or work? And why does she have so many kids?
For contrast, I looked up how often male reproductive bills have been up for discussion in recent months. Are there bills in state legislatures to ban health insurance coverage of vasectomies? Are men who use Viagra labeled "sluts"? Are men who use condoms loose?
Feminist Naomi Wolf recently wrote, "It would be a mistake to see these attacks as simply a backlash against women. This is about empire struggling for social control." In essence, then, this is not simply a "War on Women," it is a "Continuing War on People Who Have Always Been Oppressed," and women are a part of it. This seems likely, as I've heard my fair share of anti-immigrant, racist, classist dialogue in recent months, and there are people actively in the government waging wars on people on other fronts (points in case: Arizona, Alabama). But even if there is a War on Immigrants, the War on Women Immigrants is worse. If there is a War on People of Color, the War on Women of Color is worse. If low-income folk are hurting, low-income women are hurting more.
Take the recent voter registration purges and requests for ID at the polls. I often hear people say "Well, why not? We only want legal citizens voting!" Fine, but as Florida has been proving, then there is the accidental purge of legal voters. Because they don't drive or can't afford an ID. Or because they changed their name. Or because of a simple typing error during the purge.
How does this affect women worse? Personal example: I'm divorced. I was identified from birth by my name, after marriage by my ex's name, and after divorce back again to my name. My IDs and documents reflect these changes, based on when I applied for things. (My passport? Hyphenated. Work ID? My birth name. Original Iowa teaching license and letters of recommendation I submitted to grad school last year? My ex's name). Guess how many times my ex has had to change his set of IDs, bank cards, mailing labels, or teaching licenses. Exactly. Immigrants, low-income folk, and people of color will be the groups most negatively affected. But immigrant women, low-income women, and women of color? You got it.
I got in a Facebook fight the other day with someone who told me that "sexism was is gone" and that women "just have a chip on their shoulder" about equal pay. There is no need to repeat here the profusion of studies that show women aren't actually paid equally even when the job and qualifications are the same. I called Marie Lausch last week for information on this. Lausch is president of UE Local 222, the big statewide public employee local in Connecticut; sits on the UE General Executive Board; works as a 911 Dispatcher in New Britain; CT, and is a long-time champion for of women's equality. So I will use this space to address what Lausch called primarily female jobs (for example, paraeducator) and primarily male jobs (for example, school custodian) and the pay disparity between them. Obviously, both jobs are important and keep the school running and the kids learning. Is one more valuable than the other? What would cause one to be paid more than the other? While reiterating that custodians serve a very important purpose and do a very important job, Lausch noted, so do paraeducators. Paraeducators are working directly with children, often in special education classrooms. But paraeducators, at the school district Lausch spoke about, were being paid less than custodians. And paraeducators, traditionally, are primarily female jobs.
I teach a class at the local university for future elementary teachers. Elementary teaching is a profession dominated by females and plagued by low pay compared with other professional jobs. Guess how many females were in my spring semester class of 28 future elementary teachers? Twenty-five. And I'm not distressed they're going to be teachers... I'm elated! They were brilliant! (So were the three males, by the way.) I'm thrilled that next year, they will be teaching kindergartners to love reading, and showing fourth graders how awesome books are! But the fact is... teaching is a profession we as a society reward with lower pay. And teaching is a profession where about 75 percent of the workers are women. A century ago, the majority of public school teachers were men. Pay was higher, as was esteem for the profession. But as the sex of our teachers shifted, we lowered their pay and our regard for teachers.
Women are more likely than men, regardless of race or age, to be poor. We encourage women to go into lower paying jobs and discourage them from higher paying ones, or once they populate a job more than men, we simply just pay them less. Pensions for women are generally smaller because women take time off to raise a family and their education is less and comes later. And immigrant women, women of color, and low-income women have to deal with all the anti-immigrant, racist, and anti-working class nonsense, in addition to the barriers women face.
So what is the answer? Writer and activist Audre Lorde wrote there are no new ideas. "There are only old and forgotten ones, new combinations, extrapolations and recognitions from within ourselves - along with the renewed courage to try them out." So find that courage. Stand in solidarity. Use your voice. My great-grandma back on the farm in Iowa couldn't vote and was likely not encouraged to express her opinions. But I can and I'm not going to do it quietly. And finally, delete your Facebook friends who say you have a chip on your shoulder. (I already did).
Kate Kedley, a first-year graduate student and teaching assistant at the University of Iowa in language, literacy and culture, is a steward in Local 896-Committee to Organize Graduate Students (COGS).