OnLine With Zoe

Service is Leadership and Leadership is Service

Over the last few months I have been asked, I have written and I hold steadfast on the subject of privilege.  I hope that I have not participated in the singling out of one person but rather have held the conversation on a general plane; an applicable plane.  I realize there may be a lot to say about an individual on this issue but not by bystanders and not in the public square.  I believe and I live that I am accountable for my life, I demonstrate with my life, that is the purpose of life.

While working on a new memoir, when I got to 1975, I wrote about my year teaching at an all-girls high school in Echo Park which was 90% Latina.  After the chapter was done, I realized that I had demonstrated what I think about privilege even back then.  To me it seemed obvious and not some heady philosophical theory at all.  It was the organic response to empowering the disenfranchised.  If I am a senior in a meeting of young feminists, if a straight person comes to a meeting of LGBT people, if a White person comes to a meeting of People of Color; the right thing to do is to support the emerging group in service to their empowerment. 

In a recent interview, the journalist asked, “So you think that Mr. so-in-so had no place at a women’s march?”   Oh, yes I do: Fundraising before the march.  Arranging for city permits.  At the end of the march, picking up litter.  At the landing of the March checking the sound.  Along the route with a First Aid kit.  But never leading.  The interviewer was not interested or, maybe, lost his verve as I did not give him the answer he wanted.  Pity.

This what I think about privilege and how I demonstrated it. 

Early in the year, when I was having a meltdown about no one doing any homework, one of the Sisters told me that many of them have no time for such things.  They worked or they were the primary adult in the household making dinner for their younger siblings.  I had to get hip to all that pretty fast.  Many times, maybe most days, someone was missing and it was because of a funeral, a gang funeral; a brother, a boyfriend, a tribe mate.  These girls knew things I could not imagine.  Try as I might, love them as I did, it was clear they needed a Latina standing in front of them not a privileged white girl, wearing a navy linen dress, driving her red beetle from the beach.  They needed a woman who knew their lives, their family life, their future possibilities and could demonstrate how to push onward.  On Holy Thursday I gave my notice with one caveat, asking Sister Jeannine to hire only a Spanish speaking Latina to teach junior and senior religion.  It made me really sad but right is right.  I was given the “Most Liked Teacher” award that year.  A treasured pearl.

The MOVEMENT needs us to prioritize and study leadership.

My plan was to avoid the conversation all together but my plan has evaporated.  About a week ago I saw, on facebook around 9 PM,  a picture of Hugo Schwyzer with a red circle and strike on it.  I opened the page, “Feminists Against Hugo Schwyzer“ and watched the “like” tally roar.  I think I went to bed when it was at about 160.  Now it is at 566 and the debate has bled all over the pond, small pond but one of the ponds I frequent.  I am not certain I want to get in the fracas but my thinking is mine, I own it and offer it. 

It seems that there are a lot of very strong opinions, strong like coffee or a scent is strong.  There is little that is subtle or mindful or aware or refined or worthy of many of the writers.  I am choosing to believe that many of the voices around this pond are gifted thinkers; by that I mean I would like to hear from them on the actual subjects of privilege, gender, leadership; the entire oppressed/oppressor paradigm.  I am sincerely flummoxed that the conversation always includes names and never takes a leap to arching lessons, tenets, ideas, general social conclusions, etc.

My unfolding in activism has always been parallel with expanding my understanding of humans, of organic physics, of the science of leadership.  I have to admit, this keeps me sane in the face of Roe eroding, Prop 8, unforgivable suicides and so much more.  I do not use it as an excuse but as a shoring up of my heart in terrible bloody waters. 

I want to talk about the role of a white person in racial civil rights.  I want to talk about a rich person’s responsibility to the economically depressed.  I want to talk about the best place for a senior when surrounded with young people, young legs, young minds and new ideas.  I want to talk about straight allies and their fundamental necessity in the LGBT movement. 

Most of what I have learned on this subject is from Robert Greenleaf and Margaret Wheatley.  The finest leader I have read about is Leo in Hesse’s Journey to the East.  He meets a group of western pilgrims and builds them a fire, cooks their food, arranges their passage through the Himalayas while never mentioning that he is the Abbott they are searching for at the monastery which is their final destination on their treacherous trip.  They think he is their servant, their Sherpa, their inferior and all the while they are traveling; warm and safe.  They are becoming independent and Leo knows that his invisibility is integral to their mutual success.

I think Malcolm X is another powerful example.  He did not want privileged white people anywhere near his movement until he circumambulated the Great Mosque seven times, found his own higher self and, then, considered the place of blue-eyed people.  And we have to see that Branch Rickey brought up Jackie Robinson but Robinson ran the bases.  I believe that HRC should have a straight ally on their Board of Directors because there is no movement without expansion out of our queer ghetto but the majority, the leaders must be queer.

All of this seems to me to be a worthy conversation.  It would be a worthy conversation for anyone who is interested in the matrix of domination, who cares about the empowerment of the disenfranchised, certainly anyone who has studied The Pedagogy of the Oppressed.  Not only is this a conversation that the current circumstances could benefit from but our intersected futures as well.  Instead of keeping the conversation so puny as to be about one human this could have been about the physics of change. 

 Oh I have opinions about Hugo’s past, his teaching, his writing, his devotees.  As a member of Alanon for almost 40 years, I have opinions about addiction.  I have a boatload of opinions about rape culture, violence against women and men, about the mis/use of the word feminism.  However, what I really care about is the rising of the oppressed which will release the oppressor from our shared cycle ~ advancing all of society.  Hugo and you and I are just a few players who have a lot to do that is way beyond personal, beyond name-calling, beyond defenders v. attackers.

The MOVEMENT needs us to prioritize and study leadership.  Settle for nothing less.  Learn to build your own fire, to travel your road and pave it wide enough for all of us.  These two pictures are all I have to say about this individual controversy ~ now I gotta get back to work.

A Big Fat Thank you

Today, as I was sitting at the Hollywood NOW table at the Love Your Body Day celebration, a woman stopped and asked me if it would be okay to ask me a question.  Of course, I said.  She covered her mouth with her hand for a moment and then removed it to say, “Do you mind being overweight?”  I laughed and said no, not at all; certainly not in the ways she wanted me to mind. 

As we talked for a long time, she told me that she is 68.  She had once been overweight but worked really hard on it and continues.  She was so small, maybe 5’2’ and 115 lbs.  Then she got to the important point, she is terribly worried about her daughter.  She said when they take her grandchildren to MacDonald’s she finds it impossible to watch her daughter eat french fries.  I laughed again and said, well I won’t be eating with you either.  You mean to say that if we go out and I order an hot fudge sundae and you order what ever you want, you will be disturbed that I am eating ice cream?  Yes, she said.

She inquired further, aren’t you worried about your health?  I told her that it seems to me that 1) worry is unhealthy & 2) it is no ones business but my own.  I told her that each of us has a 3x5 card entitled, MY BUSINESS; that no ones body should be on that card but our own.  Her daughter’s body should not be on her card at all. 

She just said it was too hard.  I asked her how she felt about all the fabulous fat women at the event today, high heels, sexy, all glammed up for the fashion show.  She was really uncomfortable with it.  I told her that the judge inside her head, sitting high up in her perfect black robe needed to be fired.  She was not popular, making any friends and doing a lot of harm.  Finally I told her to go to the most expensive bakery in her neighborhood, buy their very best cake, take it to her daughter and tell her that she was sorry.  Tell her that she could not change all at once but she would keep working on telling that judge, YOU’RE FIRED.

I suppose that was my mom.  She was so ashamed of me, taking me to the chubby department, putting gussets in my girl scout uniform, telling me often how terrible things fit.  My First Communion dress has to be made as I did not fit in the ones in the store. 

Mom’s who cannot love their daughters, big or small, pierced or inked, dressed in ways that confound, suffer a torture of their own design.  I hope daughters find themselves and end this terrible legacy.  Lane Bryant, Torrid, INC; Love Your Body Day and Chenese Lewis you are healing a generation.    

Who is our Harijan?

Happy Birthday, Gandhiji

October 2, 1869 our lives were changed forever.  Not that Mohandas arrived fully enlisted in the liberation movement.  He was privileged, wore western clothes, studied in London.  He wandered British society looking for non-meat eaters and found a group of Russian mystics and self-proclaimed magicians.  He was in training to be a barrister and his interest in women’s rights brought him to Royal Albert Hall to hear Mrs. Pankhurst talk about suffrage and direct action.  He sat in the same audience as Alice Paul and, even then, his sensibility was to leave when violence was promoted.  Breaking windows was going too far for Mohan.

It was the famous train ride through South Africa when M.K. Gandhi, graduated attorney, refused to move to second class and was thrown off, that his world shattered.  He had always traveled first class, we know that included the liner to Britain and getting around London.  Makes one wonder if he had no real consciousness of class before going to London.  Much like Siddhartha who knew he had to escape the palace wall to see true life in his country.  It was a real world encounter that created change.  But once realized, both these men were called to tell the world.

Looking around their worlds, the Lord Buddha, Jesus Christ and M.K. Gandhi all came to the same conclusion; that a person of conscience relates to the most oppressed.  Siddhartha encountered a sick man, an old man and a dead man; something he had never seen inside his father’s palace.  His response was to sit in silence until he could solve these newly discovered puzzles.  Once solved, he entered the working class.  Upon his death, he asked his students to destroy all likenesses of him; so much for obedient students.  None the less the inference was and remains, that Buddhists relate to and concern themselves with, the oppressed. 

Jewish fisherman, Joshua ben David was not born a wealthy man however he came to a similar conclusion.  To earn eternal peace, one would have to care for the poorest of the poor and when the middle class made inquiry, he said that when you see such a poor person, you would be seeing him, in fact.  As you do for the least, you do for him.

The complexity of Gandhi is so varied and rich, maybe even out of reach to the Western mind.  Raised as both a Hindu and Muslim in an upper caste, he was able to get a very wide view of his Mother India, eventually the world.  No only did he respond to the poverty imposed by British occupation but he also combined his response with his spiritual practice.  Refusing to wear western clothes, he put on the clothes of the poorest of India; the untouchables.  It was simultaneously a political and spiritual response for Gandhi.

Just as Gandhi was taught direct action by a woman, Emmeline Pankhurst, he adopted a term used centuries before him by another woman, Gangasati.  She was a Bhakti Yogini and writer in the 13th Century.  To counter the terrible oppression and status of women, Gangasati called them Harijan which means Children of God.  Gandhi renamed the untouchables Harijan, He even went on to name one of his newspapers, The Harijan.  He believed we are all, “Children of God.”

Today who is our Harijan?  In the Queer Movement is it transgendered people?  In the Women’s Movement is it those seeking safety from violence?  In the Immigration Movement is it the children of parents split through deportation?  In the Reproductive Movement is it the poor?  Regardless of who it may be, it is you and it is me as we are all Children of God.

Get me a Piece of Vanilla, Milquetoast, BS Pie

Imagine if the film industry took every meaningful, inspiring, insightful and incite-ful story and made it G-rated, a box office success and shaved off every bit of thorny truth or multi-layered complexity.  Imagine if a writer misrepresented a real person and retold a historic event to suit themselves.  Maybe it is their right to do that, to show one side of a life, but a tragic loss occurs when a generation believes that the sanitized version, the mischaracterization, the fantasy re-telling is the actual reality.

Every year around Women’s Equality Day, the best of people advise us to watch Iron Jawed Angels.  Every year I comment that Alice was so much more.  Not only was she more than the movie character but the striking inaccuracies reveal a warped bias on the part of the movie makers.  They made up a male interest.  They made up a Congress member’s wife.  They imply that Alice had some kind of melancholy about not having children (the fictional boyfriend is a widower with a son who charms Alice).  But, more importantly, what is lost in this fantasy?  What is the viewer robbed of?  That is the real tragedy.  Who was this strong, mouthy, brave, relentless, sometimes divisive woman?  It is my position that the fluffy interpretation negatively impacts every American woman who would have found camaraderie in the true fire and soul of Alice Paul.  I would go so far as to say that the pink hat wearing, gum chewing, bumbling character is held up to be an example as to how far an acceptable woman can veer from lady-like behavior.  Read a book and you will see what it actually took for her to accomplish the 19^th Amendment, how she stood trial in 1917, her demanding leadership style, she did not suffer fools, she was not anything near the Hillary Swank edition.

Now the identical thing will be happening around May 22, Harvey Milk Day.  Oh yes, the movie Milk won an Oscar, starred Sean Penn, was truly moving.  I have watched it 6 times, at least.  But if you watch The Times of Harvey Milk and then watch Milk - ask two questions: What is the difference in these two representations of Harvey and what is the impact to future generations if they believe the man portrayed in Milk is the whole picture.  The fictionalized Milk epitomizes the very thing that is a terrible problem in the LGBT movement; it shows a single issue man on a single issue mission.  The Times of Harvey Milk shows Harvey working with labor, with women, with seniors, with people of color and imparts to the viewer that being gay was one facet of Harvey - he was the Mayor of Castro before it was a mecca for gays.  He was inclusive and open; something the LGBT movement could surely use today.  My hope is that high schools that do celebrate Harvey Milk Day will watch BOTH movies and have a real lesson plan that identifies the differences in these movies.   

Most recently I sat in a theater and watched, The Help.  Loved it.  Loved the casting.  Loved the poster.  Loved the sets, the clothes, the chotchkies, the music.  But I am 63 and lived through that period and I know that the entire movie from start to end was one vanilla, milquetoast, BS pie.  It has nothing to do with the facts of prejudice, poverty, politics of that time.  Madger Evers murder was some little wispy mention, a black woman leaving her abusive husband was a flick solved with some deep fry and what’s more fun than not allowing a woman to use the loo – a knee slapping good laugh; pass the popcorn.  Hollywood will surely have a 5 minute reprieve from sexism during Oscar season, as The Help gets a dozen nominations.  Can’t you just picture all of the bigotry and anti-woman business of the industry being whitewashed on the red carpet.  And what of this movie being used as a teaching tool?  Gee, wasn’t the 60’s just a lot of good music and silly women acting all clique-ky.

Notable exceptions validate a wish that non-documentary films can tell the truth.  Sir Richard Attenborough’s Gandhi was meticulously scripted and shot.   In fact, the book, Gandhi, A Pictorial Biography shows the shots side by side; Patel, Nehru, Kasturba, Jinnah, the ashrams, the courtrooms, the jails – all painstakingly accurate.  Certainly Gandhi the man was infinitely more complex than this movie but it is not dishonest, sanitized, fictionalized and offers the viewer genuine inspiration. 

Martin Scorsese’s Kundun, portrays the life of the 14^th Dalai Lama from ages 2- 24 with astounding accuracy.  Particularly significant is that many of the actors are direct blood relatives of His Holiness, the Dalai Lama.  You can be sure that the ceremonies and traditions are accurately portrayed.  

I love movies.  I love social justice.  I worry that cute is painting over pure.  I worry that polite is being advanced as possible.  I worry that women, in particular, are being corralled by darling little shots of Ben teaching Alice to drive.  I worry when Hollywood makes a movie that implies that the Civil Rights Movement was a wonderful success and, golly, wasn’t it just a lot of fun.    

Bridging Generations ~ You're Invited

As you know, the bridging of generations has long been a dream of mine.  It was set on fire, 2007, the night I sat in the balcony in the Ebell at a Feminist Majority Foundation celebration. It was quite the gala.  All of the people you would hope to see, Peg Yorkin, Eleanor Smeal, Cameron Manheim, Margaret Cho, Maxine Waters, Gloria Steinem, Tyne Daly, Carol Moseley Braun, etc.  It was the equivalent of Rockin’ to the Oldies with the Beatles, Stones and Roy Orbison at the Forum in the ‘70’s. (yes, I did see that)

I asked myself and everyone I could get to listen ~  What if the interns and students, who had been seated in the balcony, had been seated up front?  What if the registration tables had been staffed by the luminaries as the new feminists checked in. What if the Wildwood Girls Choir and After School All Stars had been first not last?  What if the veteran leaders simply got under, behind, next to – the rising leaders of tomorrow? NOW That’s A Tidal Wave.

I searched my current blog (2005 – current) on the word, WAVE and discovered I have been writing about this for 6 years.  Starting with Bridging the Waves in 2006.  Most recently, Surfing Two Waves, March 2010.  And, honestly, my life had been thrown an unexpected loop in that after turning 60, two of my closest friends are under 35.  Politically I am drawn to people half my age. I find ink, Slutwalk, facebook, Bitch Magazine, the ERA Education Project much more simpatico than many of my “older sisters” tend to. 

I am convinced that what is missing is a two way street - a street where both the Veteran Feminist and the Rising Feminist arrive asking, How can I help?  What can I do to advance your life?  The missing thread is mutual inquiry as opposed to an assumption that one knows and the other one needs to know.  This is not the mentor/apprentice model. This recognizes that two feminists have much to share, much to learn and much to give. This acknowledges that TODAY is in play and, though the past can inform, we are alive now.  Our combined vision is more accurate and powerful than standing alone. 

May, 2011, my bff said she wanted to make a playground for this to occur.  We asked two more astounding feminists to join in and the four of us founded The Bridge Project.   With the support of the Veteran Feminists of America, The Bridge Project was launched June 21, 2011. 

The Mission ~  The Bridge Project, of the Veteran Feminists of America, offers feminists the opportunity to meet people of different generations, develop relationships and establish true lineage in American Feminism.  The Bridge Project is open to members of the VFA.  Members can submit an application to the Bridge Project Committee who will help match interests, identify pairs and send invitations to the two feminists. 

The relationship is as strong or light as the partners define.  Exchanging ideas, values, talents and skills. These matches can enrich the lives of all who participate; neither partner doing more or less, each contributing their best with as much or as little as they mutually agree. The hope is that matching intersecting pairs will create continuity, community and intergenerational communication. 

If you want to meet a feminist of another generation; if you want to give to a feminist of another generation; if you want to create a tidal wave, join the Bridge Project.  Somebody is hoping to hear from you.

Congratulations NWPC on 2011 ERA Resolution

 

 

 

NWPC 2011 Conference ERA Resolution

Whereas
NWPC founding was spurred on by Congress' failure to pass the Equal Rights Amendment in 1970

Whereas
NWPC believes that legal, economic and social equity requires explicit inclusion of women in the US Constitution

Whereas
Representative Carolyn Maloney (HJ Res 69)  & Senator Robert Menendez (SB Res 21) have introduced the ERA into the 112th Congress which includes the 24 words of the 1948 ERA and would begin the ratification process with no deadline attached

Whereas
Representative Tammy Baldwin has introduced HJ Res 47 into the 112th Congress, seeking to remove the June 30, 1982 deadline which would reset the amendment process with 35 ratified states, requiring 3 more for the 38 required for ratification. 

NOW BE IT RESOLVED
that the National Women’s Political Caucus supports both HJ Res 69 & SB Res 21 (the full ERA with a deadline) and HJ Res 47 (removing the 06/30/82 deadline) acknowledging that each leads to the same end of full constitutional equality.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that the National Women’s Political Caucus is committed to the 112th Congressional process; hearings, vote on the floor, sign at the White House and sending out to the states

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that the National Women’s Political Caucus, for purposes of information, continuity and dedication of focus, appoint a National ERA Liaison

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
That the National Women’s Political Caucus will deliver a copy of the final, passed and signed 2011 ERA Resolution to the offices of Senator Robert Menendez, Representative Carolyn Maloney and Representative Tammy Baldwin with our thanks and commitment to their ERA campaigns. 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that National Women’s Political Caucus proudly stands and offers her full political weight to say, Equality of Rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

Summer Celebration of Choice

Next Week I am going to Germantown, Maryland to stand outside of Dr. Carhart’s Clinic. He is one of the remaining 5 late term abortion doctors who faces death threats for himself and his family every day. Operation Rescue, who assassinated Dr. Tiller, is camping out in front of Dr. Carhart’s clinic for a week.  The Summer Celebration of Choice is my response, the NOW response, the choice response.

The week begins with a Kick-Off Walk. 

I hope you will sponsor me at the Summer of Choice Kick-off Walk. My goal is a million dollars, but $5 is good too. you can click this to sponsor me. 100% is for the clinic – not my travel. It is a direct donation to The Abortion Access Fund.   (BTW it is not per mile but a single donation.)

My reason for supporting the Summer Celebration of Choice ~

I am a proud supporter of CHOICE.  I believe that women can make their own decision about family planning.  I believe that pre-sex birth control is the first choice, the best choice, but if that is not the case and a woman finds herself pregnant, her heart and soul will make the right choice.  Let me add that if a young woman is old enough to be pregnant, she is old enough to make this decision and choose whom to consult with.  Parental consent is not a reasonable requirement.

I have had 2 abortions.  They were easy choices.  They were not easy to have.  They were after 1973, so I am so fortunate that millions of Americans worked for a safe clinic environment for me.  They did not destroy my life.  They are not frivolous or trivial.  I am not proud of them but speak openly because my ability to be open might help someone else who does not have such a luxury.

When I had my second one, age 43, after it was over I put out my hand to thank the Dr.  He was so shocked.  I told him that I understood the importance of his work and that, for the most part, it is thankless.  Thank you Dr. Carhart and thank you to the countless women and men who are clinic excorts, you are our Guardian Angels.

Dr Carhart's Invitation

To our male allies: a challenge ~~ by Guest Blogger

I am so proud to have blogger, Shannon Drury, as a guest today.  She makes me proud to be a woman, proud of NOW, hopeful for the future and to respect the word, HOUSEWIFE.  It is also posted on her site, The Radical Housewife.  She and I see eye to eye on the organic powerful SlutWalk Movement.  Here is her blog on SlutWalk in its entirety:

Two years ago, I participated in a MPRIG-sponsored panel on sexual violence during the University of Minnesota's Welcome Week. To their great credit, a large number of earnest 18-year-olds showed up to discuss an issue far less appealing than learning the forehand frisbee throw. During both the morning and the afternoon sessions, I heard a question that I remember from my own college days, asked the bravest straight male in the room: "This is really upsetting. Are women actually assuming I'm a perpetrator just because I have a penis?"

I'm sorry if it feels that way, I said. But don't blame women. Blame guys like Neal Krasnoff, author of the blog The Loyal Opposition.

Now I'm not saying that Neal is a perp any more than those college guys were, but I do know that he has a mean streak a mile wide, and he vents said meanness on his blog. Normally, I'm of the mind to let creeps like him be. Why send him the web traffic? But today, the circumstances are different than when he called me a "matriarchic supremacist" back in 2008. I can handle personal trashing, but when I read his new post about SlutWalk Minneapolis (called "If she dresses like a slut, and acts like a slut, is she really a feminist?"), I felt a response was necessary.

Last week I wrote a post about frustration with rape culture that was borderline misandrous, and I was called out as such by a secret fan of mine who linked to it on a Modern Radio discussion forum. Since Jawknee also mentioned that I am "great" and "super smart," I know that he must have seen my point: that rape culture curdles the souls of even sensible women from time to time. And Krasnoff's piece on SlutWalk Minneapolis is as soul-curdling a bit of rape apologia as I have read in a long time. Set your TRIGGER WARNING alarm, then read him here:

“Slutwalk” ideology is not about rape, as the protestors claim. It is about an attempt to abrogate the moral agency of women. It posits that women can behave as they wish with no consequences for their acts. ...dressing up in a club miniskirt, dancing and grinding with alcohol-fueled, hypersexualized 20-something men at a downtown club, then going back to their apartment with them to presumably discuss the Brothers Karamazov. Or travelling without niqab in Taliban controlled territory. Or holding raw meat out in front of a starving dog.

[caption below a photo of a woman, her bra visible, holding a "no means no sign"] Does NO still mean NO if this gorgeous Asian slutwalker does everything to say "f--- me"?

I hear quite a bit from straight men about how they aren't sure that feminism is for them, while at the same time bemoaning the guilty until proved innocent phenom mentioned above. Well, guess what? It's anti-feminist jerks like Krasnoff who are making your lives difficult, fellas. What on earth could make anyone feel comfortable comparing a woman to a slab of "raw meat"? Sexism. It's not confined to small-time weirdos on the internet, either. It's everywhere.

Help us end it, guys. We can't do it without your help. We need you to speak out against this warped view of the world. You are not dogs, and we are not meat. We are all human beings who deserve respect, safety, and freedom.

What's the saddest thing about a piece of writing like this? Neal Krasnoff knows rape survivors. He's friends with them, he works with them, he even has some in his own family. He doesn't realize this, though, because no survivor would ever share her truth with a guy him. Yet he takes to his blog and condemns these very women for failing to apply "reasonable judgment and common sense." I wonder how that goes over with the women in his life who were molested by family members and/or raped by their boyfriends, let alone the ones who were victimized after a night on the town. They have my compassion and pity. Neal? Not so much.

ERA ~ We Can Do It Better This Time

Recently there have been two posts on HuffPo by pro-ERA writer, Barbara Grufferman. 

There have been dozens of anti-ERA comments and I want to make a lot of noise about how that is happening so that maybe now in 2011, as opposed to 1982, we can identify these gnats; their mission, their methods and their insignificance.  It is my opinion that they are meaningless with only one exception; their free time to buzz about spinning the illusion that they have something to say.  They are doing it as a matter of mission; church mission.  And the service they provide is purely diversionary.  They have no power in this issue whatsoever.  I think even they don't realize it.  

Back in 1982, on the days when IL was going to discuss the ERA, there would be dozens of ladies dressed in red that matched the red carnations on the desks of anti-ERA legislators.  There was some fantasy that they were in partnership.  The only thing they had in common was the color red.  The legislators had gotten elected with massive campaign donations from the insurance industry and corporations that were making money paying women less than men; both in money and benefits.  But there they were, the ladies dressed in red, thinking they were swaying the country on issues like the draft and same-sex bathrooms.    

To get this done, THIS time, we have to be strategic about where the opposition gets their MONEY.  We have to know that it is not eagle forum, it is not Phyllis Schlafly, it is not about toilets.  It is about WalMart, the Fair Paycheck Act and Health Insurance.  It is about making money paying women less, charging women more and sqeezing all the work out of women as their backs can bear. It is time to trivialize the ladies in red and their corny, idiotic, childish arguments. 

To get this done THIS time, we need to get both strategies rolling through the pipeline with committee hearings, congressional voting and presidential support.  The fact that our constitution is less inclusive than the ones in countries where we have killed thousands for women to be included is beyond the realm of understanding. 

HERE IS MY RESPONSE ON HUFFPO.  I encourage you to leave a civil and insightful comment there too. 

As a lifelong ERA Activist and staunch supporter of both strategies, I am so glad to see posts on the ERA, particularly by even handed, balanced writers like Ms Grufferman.  I would caution some readers that the overwhelming majority of Americans not only are in favor of the ERA but believe it passed. 

Secondly, it has always been introduced into Congress, always.  Is lands in the Sub-committee on Constitutional amendments and is not being given hearings.  A few years ago there was a lot of excitement that it was going to be heard and, the then, President Bush called Pretraus to the to hill for emergency hearings and the ERA was bumped. 

If we want to see it come out to the states it has to move through the subcommittee, the committee, Congress and the President.  Then it is voted on the state chambers, subject to the various state rules, such as requiring a super-majority,  Had it been a simple majority, it would have passed in 1982.

The 1982 deadline was both sinister and unprecedented.  The actually 27th amendment was passed with no deadline and took over 203 years.  The deadline is very dubious and the passage of HJ Res 47, rescinding the deadline, is one very effective and hopeful possibility.  However it would be a first and we are not certain the outcome.  Frankly, I have deeply considered both strategies and arrived at the same position of both bills authors; to support both.  There is no reason to pick one over the other until one really picks up stream, pulls out of the pack and, then, ALL HANDS ON DECK.

Finally, we need to see clearly that the pro-traditional family people who are still harping about gender neutral restrooms, the draft and other such applications that scare people, have absolutely nothing to do with this; nothing.  They were flitting about state capitols in 1982 and they have a search engine find pro-ERA articles so they can write their little trivia. 

To win, we must understand what the fight is about - MONEY.  It is all about corporate money.  We need campaign finance rules, universal health care and the fair paycheck act.  We need to stop the practice of corporations making more money hiring women and insurance companies making up to 48% more money insuring women.

Carolyn Maloney, Bob Menendez & Tammy Baldwin and most Americans want the US Constitution include equality of rights.  We have work to do - fine work, good work, smart work.