Senator Kerry and the "Girl Effect"

I know it's been a few months under this new leadership, but I still get pretty bowled over when politicians publicly champion women's rights and not in a we-should-respect-women-by-not-letting-them-have-abortions-or-birth control kind of way. First our amazing new Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announces that the rights of women will "always be central to our foreign policy."

Then our new President Obama creates a first ever Council on Women and Girls led by Obama's senior aid, Valerie Jarrett. Signed into law on International Women's Day March 8th, the council will, according to Jarrett, "examine all the programs at the federal level that touch on women and girls and we're going to work to coordinate and make sure that each of those programs is doing everything that it could do to help support women and girls." So awesome that it's tear inducing:



Now today, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass) chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has an excellent piece published in the Washington Times discussing the state of women and girls around the world and highlights the importance of investing in our futures. Here are his main talking points:

It's up to all of us to ensure that this economic crisis does not become a global women's crisis, too. At moments like these in developing countries, women are asked to bear the brunt of the hardship. When food is scarce, economists have found that women and girls are pressured to forgo their share altogether so that men and boys have enough to eat. In the same way, we must now make sure that women workers aren't pushed aside as businesses downsize and that daughters aren't taken out of school as families search for extra income

I find it so refreshing to hear the political discourse shift from how we should cut the rights of women globally to how to champion them instead. I am always sensitive, however, to how we discuss global women's issues as to not sound like the great western world sweeping down to save the poor eastern women from their backwards society. I think this is a great piece, though. What are your thoughts? Read the entire commentary here.

Thanks to Colin for the link

I'm Not Sexist, I Voted for Hillary

Many supporters see Hillary Clinton loosing the democratic nomination as one more injustice to be tallied on that bitch of a glass ceiling that, though now cracked in 18 million places, is still holding women back after all this time. And we finally seemed so close to equality. So close to seeing a strong, capable, outspoken, liberal woman in the spotlight. A talented woman finally getting the respect she deserved. And now, we feminists have no leader...no great hope...

Wait, what?!?

Why have all the feminists seemed to have forgotten that other strong, capable, outspoken, liberal woman in the spotlight known as Michelle Obama? She has been in this race as long as Hillary, but once HRC stood aside, all eyes (and what jerky eyes they are) were on Michelle. From being Barack's "Baby Mama" to being labeled time and time again as an "angry black woman," Michelle has been taking it from every side, in much the same way as Hillary. This time, however, it's not only about being a woman, but being (dun dun dun) a woman of color, This allows for a whole new wave of insults, and injustice, the likes of which not even Hillary Clinton has seen.

So, why the silence, ladies?

I'm not the only one who finds the sudden clamming up of America's great feminist voices suspect. Over the weekend Mary C. Curtis had a few thoughts on the matter as well (from The Washington Post):

"What does Gloria Steinem think? She was out front with her support of Clinton, promoting the importance of a female president. She has even endorsed Barack Obama. What's her reaction now that the knives are out for another strong woman?

How about Geraldine Ferraro the former vice presidential nominee whose racially tinged denunciations of Barack Obama sparked a media firestorm?"

She goes onto say how she has long considered herself a feminist and once "cheered" Steinem's words, " I'd like a little of that solidarity back now, not suspicion because someone of my race defeated someone of our sex."

As both a life-long feminist, and Hillary supporter, I have noticed the large gap in our media where the justified howls of sexism against Hillary used to reside. Now feminists far and wide seemed to have stepped down, licking their wounds, discouraged in the trenches. I can only assume, feeling as though they've lost the fight, they are laying low. But why now? The show isn't over . The second act, ripe with the intersectionality of race and gender, is just beginning. Since we first started fighting for suffrage, mainstream feminism has been criticized for ignoring women of color. Criticized for acting as though the problems facing all women were that of the suburban, middle-class, white women. Now, here we are possibly on the verge of the fourth wave, still dealing with the ghosts of our fore mothers. Don't get me wrong, without their triumphs we wouldn't have the rights we do, but because of their missteps we find ourselves still unable to look beyond our own self-interest. Unable to be okay enough with our loss to stand together and make sure to prevent another.

We either care about these issues or we don't. Ignoring Michelle for the next 4 months is not only going to keep that glass ceiling we beat on for the last year and a half whole, it might even mend a few of its cracks.

And while we're at it, let's send a little love Cindy McCain's way.