Tomorrow morning, the hearings begin for Sonia Sotomayor. I have been pressuring myself for a week to write about this. Patricia Ireland has posted her support on facebook. Melody Drnach, VP Action NOW has stated NOW’s support. "We had that conversation, but we also talked about the fact that it would be very, very surprising if the president and his team would nominate somebody who was not going to believe in full equality for women and girls to be a part of the highest court in the land," Drnach said. "It came down to the fact that it's incredibly important to have women's voices at the table and certainly on the Supreme Court."
And Judge Ginsburg has expressed her belief that women on the Supreme Court is the right thing to do, the responsible thing to do. There is a fantastic interview in today’s NY Times in which she says the magic thing for me –
Q: ….Do you see, as part of a future feminist legal wish list, repositioning Roe so that the right to abortion is rooted in the constitutional promise of sex equality?
JUSTICE GINSBURG: Oh, yes. I think it will be.
But my mind is swirling within my very hard won, attacked and defended opinion about Gov. Palin and the firm position I embrace that gender is not the deciding factor in any election, appointment or even in defining a feminist. As I would say if we were together at a diner, “I gotta own my shit.”
I know only one thing about Judge Sonia Sotomayer; she is unknown on every issue I care about: equality in wages, education and opportunity; human rights; reproductive autonomy; the Equal Rights Amendment. What does that mean? How can anyone who has been in public service all these years be so enigmatic? Is that reasonably possible? Is that, in and of itself, saying something? Maybe mostly about us and our inability to be informed AND balanced.
The obvious point is that it is safe to assume she is not a criminal, like Justice Thomas. We won’t be hearing about pornography and pubic hair at the hearings. And I do assume that she will not be solely pro-corporate like Justice Roberts. I will be glad to see two women on the court. I would prefer to see five, including the Chief. (I would like that to not be seen as a wild wish ~ some crack-pot feminist musing.) I will be glad to have a judge who learned English as a second language. But I do not prefer to know nothing, to face the fact that it is only in being unknown that one can receive this exquisite appointment.
Congratulations, Judge Sonia Sotomayor. You will be confirmed and seated, then we will get to know one another; sorta like an arranged marriage and you can guess how I feel about those.
Hi, Zoe. I'm visiting you for the first time from SheWrites. I like your thought process, but I guess I would hope that we will get to know this nominee better during the hearings. Am I just being naive? I hope not. Let's hope that some of our representatives who will be sitting in on the hearings will ask the questions for us. Maybe we should send them a few suggestions.
Posted by: Susan Bearman | July 12, 2009 at 05:58 PM
zoe - thank you for posting this. i've been researching this like crazy trying to find more on real points. i'll be glued to the hearings this week but, in the meantime, thought this article might be of interest to you if you hadn't already seen it. some good points among the generalizations.
Gloria Steinem, Where Are You Now?
Posted by Adia Harvey on May 30th, 2009 2009
May 30
If you’ve been following the increasingly racist, sexist, and thoroughly disgusting attacks on Sonia Sotomayor, then you’ve no doubt seen this headline: “G. Gordon Liddy on Sotomayor: ‘Let’s Hope the Key Conferences Aren’t When She’s Menstruating.’ ”
While striking, this revolting statement is not that far of a stretch from other classics of the last few days: Sotomayor as dumpy, schoolmarmish, and too “emotional.”
These statements are obviously grossly offensive and fairly reek of profoundly sexist ideals. I do not claim to be a Supreme Court expert, but I’ve been following nominations pretty closely since the Clarence Thomas debacle in the 1990s and have yet to hear any criticisms of any male justices’ appearance or emotional tenor. As far as I can tell, when it was time to consider his nomination to the Court, no one cared what Antonin Scalia looked like or bothered to describe him as dumpy, fat, or bloated. No one asked whether Clarence Thomas had the temperament for the Supreme Court, even though he looked mad enough to spit nails when he had to face accusations of sexual harassment, while Anita Hill remained calm and unflappable when Orrin Hatch and Arlen Specter basically called her a liar. The double standard here is a glaringly obvious, clear cut, basic example of sexism in American politics. How else to explain that looks and emotion suddenly became significant issues for Judge Sotomayor when they never mattered for any of her predecessors?
But I don’t need to point all this out, because fortunately we have a number of prominent feminist women who are quick to use their public platform to denounce obvious cases of sexism, and to condemn those who are instrumental in perpetuating these assaults against women…right? Why, just last year, noted feminist icon Gloria Steinem (image from here), wrote a widely discussed editorial in the New York Times defending then-Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton against charges of sexism, and lamenting that “the sex barrier was not taken as seriously as the racial one.”
During this same election cycle, Geraldine Ferraro made controversial statements arguing that Obama’s race was an advantage, and contended that “if he were a woman of any color he would not be in this position,” implying, like Steinem, that male privilege was so endemic that it could elevate a black man over any woman of any color. Martha Burk got a lot of attention a few years back for demanding that the Masters golf tournament allow women to join its hallowed ranks, and was a clear, cogent voice in drawing attention to this institutionalized sexism in the athletic world.
Funny how I haven’t heard any statements from these women castigating G. Gordon Liddy, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, or Michael Steele for their repugnant, sexist, and racist remarks about Judge Sotomayor. Funny how they haven’t jumped out in front of this issue the same way they did when Hillary Clinton was the one on the receiving end of a barrage of sexist statements. Funny how the PUMAs (Party Unity My Ass) who were so outraged at the way the Democratic Party ostensibly treated Hillary Clinton now don’t seem to see this as a worthy cause of their efforts, and aren’t outraged by Democratic politicians’ unwillingness to call these abhorrent statements the blatant misogyny that they are.
What’s not funny are the implications this has for women of all races. When white feminists look the other way when Michelle Obama is callously referred to as “Obama’s Baby Mama,” when Sonia Sotomayor is savaged by right wing conservatives who engage in the basest types of sexism, or more broadly, when women of color across the country face higher rates of abuse, incarceration, and poverty than white women, it sends a clear message about their lack of respect for and interest in the ways sexism impacts women of other racial groups and class positions. It reinforces the idea that white women feminists are interested in maintaining their white privilege while undermining sexism, a process that keeps women of color oppressed but broadens the category of whites who have access to and are able to wield power over others. It perpetuates the (erroneous) message that feminism has nothing to offer women of color, even though they too suffer from the gender wage gap, sexual violence, and all the other manifestations of gender inequality.
I do not understand why white feminists like Steinem, Ferraro, Burk, and others still don’t seem to get this message that intersections of race and gender matter and that the feminist movement cannot succeed without the influence and involvement of ALL women.
This point has been made for years, by many progressive white women (playwright Eve Ensler, sociologist Margaret Andersen) and feminists of color (sociologist Patricia Hill Collins, activist Pauli Murray, writer Alice Walker). It would be really nice if the rampant sexism being directed towards Sonia Sotomayor finally served as an overdue wake-up call about the importance of both race and gender.
Posted by: sharron | July 12, 2009 at 06:27 PM
I don't know the author of this piece but she does not know Gloria Steinem, who will only speak on a panel if there are women of color. I understand the principle of intersectionality and have written about it here several times. Racism and sexism are never ok, never; be they simultaneous or individual.
My point is not really about any of that - but rather that Judge Sotomayor is unknown and I find that peculiar in and of itself. I have no idea what is her stand on capital punishment, immigration, choice, ERA, anything really AND she is ours for life. I hope she turns out to be a lot better than many of Obama's other appointments.
Just today I heard that Obama's appointment to Secretary of the Army is Representative John McHugh, R New York, worked to reduce women's opportunities in the military by attempting to exclude women from positions where 17,000 Army women already were serving, is opposed providing funds for abortions for military women and voted against the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.
Posted by: Zoe Nicholson | July 12, 2009 at 10:23 PM