Today is the Massachusetts Special Election. If you live in Massachusetts, don’t forget to vote.
We are volunteering today. So until we return, here is an interesting op-ed on the election from Joan Vennochi at boston.com.
Much of the media coverage of the Massachusetts special election to fill Ted Kennedy’s senate seat has focused on the leading candidates’ personalities, or perceived lack of personality in the case of Attorney General Martha Coakley. Reporters are quick to point out voters know more about Coakley professionally than personally. She has been referred to as an ice queen and a mean girl, monotone, robotic, with no fire in her belly, and the “personality of a frumpy substitute teacher.”
The Boston Globe says,
“She hides her personality behind a businesslike veneer.”
Inherent in many of these articles I believe there is an unconscious gender bias. Many career women, especially women from Coakley’s generation, have been conditioned to separate their personal and professional personas. We are taught that in order to be taken seriously, we must be serious. We are told that to get to the top, we must emulate those at the top. And the reality is, most of the people at the top are still men. As a result women are trained that sports talk is okay. Girl talk is not.
When I was pregnant, I tried to change the topic and redirect any conversations about my pregnancy while at work. This despite the fact my protruding belly took up half the conference room. When I returned from maternity leave, I did not bring any pictures of my children to work and never discussed motherhood for fear I would be seen as a flight risk by my bosses.
But so much political coverage these days focuses on a candidate’s personality and so-called likeability. Is the candidate warm? Do we know them personally? And the all-important question, would we want to have a beer with them?
The above-quoted Globe article goes on to reveal some personal details about Coakley.
“Behind the scenes, Coakley reveals a quick wit and an almost easygoing personality that is striking in its contrast to her campaign identity. She expounds on her preference for pale ales (and Sam Adams or Harpoon over Guinness). She quotes lyrics from Broadway musicals (favorite: “Man of La Mancha’’). She describes hearing former governor Mitt Romney sing show tunes (yes, he can sing). She explains her unusual accent (it reflects her youth in North Adams, her career as a lawyer, and her parents’ Rhode Island origins).”
The reality is, most voters will never sit down for a beer or belt out show tunes with our elected officials. And really, why would we want to? What matters in an election is the candidates’ track records, voting history and stance on the key issues of the day. Results are what matter. At least, that’s what they taught all of us working women at the office. So to judge a woman candidate’s lack of so-called personality is to dismiss the realities of professional women. Furthermore, we are still a long way, baby, from a woman centerfold being taken seriously as a senate candidate.
Perhaps, the most ridiculous coverage I saw of Coakley, was an interview with Andy Hiller of local news station WHDH. His bio claims he is “regarded as the most provocative political reporter in New England.”
Here is some of the exchange between Hiller and Coakley:
Hiller: “With respect to your sense of humor- what’s your favorite joke?”
Coakley “Oh, I’m a horrible joke teller. I’ll be the first to tell that…” I have a horrible memory for jokes. I know them when I hear them. But I can’t give you one now.”
Hiller: “How can you replace Sen. Ted Kennedy if you can’t tell a joke? He was the best at it.”
Provocative? Hardly.
Adrian Walker at Boston.com wrote of Coakley,
“She is solid, sane, and responsible, and in a short race, that will have to see her through.”
Fine with me.
Ladies, it’s time to pay attention to the special election in Massachusetts to fill Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat, no matter where you live. When voters go to the polls next week, January 19, women everywhere stand to either gain or lose a lot.
Democratic nominee and Attorney General Martha Coakley is running against Republican nominee and State Senator Scott Brown. There is a third candidate in the race, Independent Joe Kennedy (no relation to the late Senator), but he is not considered a contender.
Until recently no one really thought Brown was a contender either. How could the Commonwealth let “The Kennedy Seat” go to a Republican? Plus, Massachusetts has not elected a Republican senator since 1972.* As a result, the race has been rather dull and garnered very little attention outside the Commonwealth.
And then the Senate passed its version of the healthcare bill and suddenly, things got interesting. Conservative interest groups, fueled by a desire to elect Brown as the 41st vote against the bill, started pouring money and volunteers into the race. The American Future Fund, a group whose members are believed to be behind the Swift Boat ad and the Willie Horton ad that hurt John Kerry and Michael Dukakis’ presidential campaigns, launched a $400,000 attack ad against Coakley. Twitter users started flooding the social media site with pro-Brown tweets, many that reference the Tea Party. Brown even raised $1 million dollars in just 24 hours. And now, polls show the race is very close.
Brown’s million dollars came from across the country because right-wing conservatives want to help support and protect their interests. Women, concerned with protecting their rights, should get involved now too.
Here’s what at stake:
Healthcare: The healthcare bill, while certainly imperfect, removes gender-biased practices and stops insurance companies from denying coverage based on preexisting conditions like rape and domestic violence. In Massachusetts, Brown filed legislation designed to ease regulations on insurance companies. Under his bill, companies may not be required to cover certain medical services including mammograms and cancer screenings.
Reproductive Rights: Coakley has a long history of supporting a woman’s right to choose and control her own body. She has the support of NARAL and Emily’s List. Pro-choice advocates are disappointed that Coakley supports the Senate healthcare bill which includes restriction on abortion. But her opponent’s record on reproductive rights is more disconcerting. He is backed by Massachusetts Citizens for Life. He co-sponsored the Women’s Right to Know Act, which would require a woman to wait 24 hours before having an abortion and view an ultrasound of their fetus. While Brown does say he supports Roe v. Wade, his campaign website reads, “I believe government has the responsibility to regulate in this area…”
Support for rape victims: Brown sponsored legislation that would allow healthcare workers to turn away rape victims from emergency rooms if they objected to providing those victims with emergency contraception.
Equal representation: Women represent 51 percent of the population but only 17 percent of the legislation. Until a group reaches critical mass, at least 30 percent representation in leadership, they are viewed and evaluated as “special interest” rather than representative. Every competent, qualified women we elect, brings us one step closer to critical mass. And, as we’ve written before,
“Women legislators bring much needed attention to so-called women’s issues such as childcare, elder care, fair workplace policies and healthcare. They serve as role models for young girls and increase women’s overall participation in government and civic issues. And women politicians work hard. According to a study from the University of Chicago and Stanford University, women in Congress, on average, introduce more bills and secure more money for their districts than their male counterparts do.”
No candidate is ever perfect ladies. But if we are going to work together to support our interests, we must remove the phrase, “I want to vote for a woman, but…” from our vocabulary and take action.
Here is what you can do:
Donate: Link here to make a donation.
Volunteer: Make calls to voters and help get the message out.
Vote: If you live in Massachusetts, get out and vote on Tuesday, January 19.
Support other qualified women candidates.
*Massachusetts has never sent a woman to the Senate.
In the last week, the once sleepy Massachusetts Senate Race has heated up. Republican Scott Brown’s campaign has been bolstered by tighter than expected polls and support from out-of-state conservative groups. The election is viewed as a barometer for what’s to come later this year and just how much support President Obama does or does not have for healthcare reform and other policies.
For an overview of what’s happening on the ground, read this update on Care2.com. Tomorrow, we will discuss what’s at stake for women in this race.
Yesterday Zach Krajacic wrote in The Christian Science Monitor, “Imagine how many lives could be saved by passing a law that requires abortion providers to show mothers considering an abortion an ultrasound video of the procedure before they are allowed to perform the abortion.” His reasoning, “Upon seeing what happens during an abortion, many women might choose to have their baby rather than go through with the abortion.”
His thinking is so flawed says the woman who walked out of childbirth class when they showed the videos. I was happy to learn some breathing techniques but there was no way I was going to watch a birth on film. If I had been forced to see what happens during childbirth, I might have chosen to keep the kids in there. By the way, I would skip a life-saving organ transplant too if you made me watch a video of the operation first. How would a video preview affect Krajacic’s feelings about his annual regular prostrate exam or colonoscopy?
Krajacic infers that because so many pro-choice people also claim to be anti-abortion, then of course they would get on board with this brilliant way to reduce the number of abortions that take place. He writes, “If pro-choice advocates are sincere with their words, wouldn’t they be happy to see fewer women choosing to have abortions as a result of technology’s ability to help ensure a fully-informed conscience?”
According to RH Reality Check, “Eleven states are considering bills that would make ultrasounds mandatory for women seeking abortions. I would have been happy to have ultrasound technology available to me when I was pregnant after a miscarriage and terrified I would lose another baby. But my insurance company wouldn’t pay for it.
Too bad men like Krajacic couldn’t spend more time worrying about how technology could positively affect issues like prenatal health, or high infant mortality rates, or the racial gap in premature births. But life isn’t really the issue here, is it?
Last Tuesday I stood outside of a polling station at 6:45 a.m. holding a sign for a candidate for U.S. Senate. For more than two hours I was out there, cold and bored, while people trickled into the voting station alone or two by two. A handful of morning commuters beeped and waved as they drove by, but otherwise, the morning was quiet and, I thought, uneventful.
I spent the rest of the day –until 7:30 that night –making calls asking people to get out and vote. The work was mind-numbing. Over and over, I left the same message. “Please remember to vote today.” I almost nodded off a few times the work was so repetitive and dull and I wondered if all the time I was spending would amount to anything. Each individual call seemed so inconsequential.
After the polls closed, I headed into the city for the campaign party. I was tired and thought about bailing, but I know that showing up is important too, so I rallied. And when I got there, and the room was buzzing with excitement, and our candidate came out and accepted the nomination, I realized, it all adds up.
Every sign hold, every phone call, all add up to something greater. Even though an action may seem small or optional at the time, they really do lead to something. It wasn’t my volunteering or my phone call that made the difference, it was the sum of so many actions that added up to victory. And standing in that hotel ballroom, I realized just how many ways we can apply that lesson.
If you are improving your health, it all adds up – everything you put in your mouth, every decision you make.
If you want to run a road race, it all adds up – every step you take; no matter how slow or how small.
If you are raising children, it all adds up – everything you say, every rule you make, every rule you break.
If you are saving for a house, it all adds up — every penny you save, every penny you spend.
If you are trying to affect change, it all adds up – every letter you send, every phone call you make, every person you reach.
Yes, I have heard the phrase, “the sum is greater than the parts.” But I needed to learn that lesson again, at that time. And even though I had an “aha” moment last Tuesday, I know I will probably relearn the same lesson several more times.
A few days after the election, I was sharing my discovery with someone older and wiser. He nodded in appreciation and shared his most recent lesson, “It takes something.” This man is very successful. Clearly he already knew this. But for some reason, he recently re-learned the lesson, and it resonated with him.
If you want to do something small, like throw a party, you can. But it takes something – cooking, cleaning, prep time.
If you want to achieve something big, like get promoted at work, you can. But it takes something – hard work, long hours, smart decisions.
Another wise friend of mine reminds us often, “Focus is your friend.” Same idea. We all know what to do. We all know what it takes. It’s just that sometimes, we need to re-learn what we already knew.
The Senate voted down the Stupak-like Nelson amendment, which would have severely restricted a woman’s right to an abortion and other related reproductive health procedures, during its healthcare debates this week. But women’s rights activists don’t think we are out of the woods yet. Both the Stupak-Pitts and the Nelson amendment were aggressive moves to take away women’s reproductive rights. Both amendments would have left women with fewer health benefits than they have now – despite the fact President Obama has promised no American will be worse off after a health bill passes.
The fact that these two amendments were even introduced and carried so much weight, signals a renewed interest by some to restrict women’s rights, not expand them. Women have raised their voices during the national debate on healthcare to demand equal coverage for equal premiums – to tell Congress we are not a pre-existing condition. And we were dismayed to see how our health was ultimately used as a bargaining chip to pass healthcare reform.
In order to “to amplify the voices of women and organizations devoted to a health care reform that is fair to women,” the Women’s Media Center has launched “Not Under The Bus.”
From the WMC:
NotUnderTheBus.com opposes recent amendments which propose the most draconian restrictions on women since the 1977 Hyde Amendment that cut federal funding for abortions by Medicaid.
NotUnderTheBus.com will serve as an aggregator and media resource center in the fight to safeguard women’s reproductive rights in the national health care reform debate.
NotUnderTheBus.com calls on all women and men who support women’s equality to take the initiative, climb aboard and start driving the bus right down Pennsylvania Avenue to ensure that health care is fair, safe, and accessible to all.
Visit Not Under the Bus to get informed and Take Action to protect women’s health.
Santa brought us a few early Christmas presents yesterday. Martha Coakley won the Democratic Primary in the Massachusetts Senate race, bringing the state one step closer to electing its first ever woman senator. And the Senate killed the Stupak-like Nelson Amendment.
Coakley would be a strong advocate for women in the Senate. Senator Al Franken is another. Spare Candy posted a transcript of his comments on the Nelson Amendment. It’s a good read.
Today is the Massachusetts Senate Primary. Polls are open 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. If you’re in the Commonwealth, please get out and vote. And may I suggest you vote for Martha Coakley?
Massachusetts voters have the opportunity to send a qualified, competent candidate –who also happens to be a woman — to the Senate. And that matters.
Women legislators bring much needed attention to so-called women’s issues such as childcare, elder care, fair workplace policies and healthcare. They serve as role models for young girls and increase women’s overall participation in government and civic issues. And women politicians work hard. According to a study from the University of Chicago and Stanford University, women in Congress, on average, introduce more bills and secure more money for their districts than their male counterparts do.
But women are woefully lacking in Massachusetts politics. The state has never had a woman senator and is currently represented by only one woman in the House of Representatives, Niki Tsongas. On Beacon Hill, women represent just 17 percent of the elected leadership. And yet, women make up more than 50 percent of the U.S. population. They have surpassed men on the national payroll, represent at least 85 percent of consumer buying power and control half of the nation’s investment wealth. They deserve equal representation.
A vote for Martha Coakley is a vote of confidence, a vote for history, for equality and for a government representative of its people.
It was another busy week and we are glad it is winding down. We’ve compiled some follow up reading for you on the topics we covered this week. But first, some news.
Massachusetts Senate candidate Martha Coakley announced today the endorsement of Gloria Steinem, founding editor and publisher of Ms. magazine, co-founder of the National Women’s Political Caucus and long-time women’s rights activist.
What is exciting and significant about this endorsement is it is yet another example that Coakley is not afraid of gender. Other women candidates often feel pressure to downplay women’s rights for fear of being seen as “just” a woman’s candidate. On the flip side, if they talk tough or wear pantsuits instead of skirts, they are criticized for being a “woman acting like a man.” Coakley is simply running on her track record and the important issues, one of which is women’s rights. Her opponents aren’t trying to hide the fact they are men and she’s not hiding the fact she is a woman.
Speaking of the Massachusetts Senate race…
Sexism Alive and Well: Joan Vennochi at The Boston Globe had a great op-ed this week on the old boy’s network. It talks about how the network protects the men’s club. Read it here.
National Day of Action: For a round up of actions and articles on the Stupak-Pitts Amendment and the fight to protect women’s rights visit The Women’s Media Center. And yes, Senator Nelson is still working on his Stupak-like Amendment.
World Aids Day: Another round up of blog posts this time on World Aids Day can be found here at Global Health Progress.
Turkeys: Roman Polanski made bail and moved to his ski chalet. The New York Times wrote a story about it and never used the word rape. Not once.
Chris Brown will tell the world tonight he is “really sorry” about beating up Rhianna. As my daughter would say, “Whatever.”
And Tiger Woods, well, we still think his problems are personal and none of our business. This whole incident is however, a good reminder that sports stars are superb athletes, not heroes. Imagine if we found our role models and heroes in our own lives instead of on the television? After all, small, everyday acts of kindness impact our lives much more than the fame and wealth of strangers.
Republicans, Get In My Vagina!
We can do it.
What It's Like to be a #WorkingMom #infographic
Awesome
