Posts Tagged ‘ Martha Coakley ’

What Should We Do About Sexism and Bachmann?

January 5, 2012
By

Michele Bachmann

Let’s not waste time debating whether sexism was a factor in Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann’s failed bid for president. It was. Let’s instead focus on what we will do about it. Because something needs to be done.

Not that we wanted to see Bachmann in the White House. God no. But nor do we want to see Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry or any other anti-woman candidate get elected. But why is Bachmann going home and not the other non-Romneys? For several reasons.

First, there is a double standard at work. Susan Mulligan at U.S. News points out, “Michele Bachmann, the Tea Party-approving Republican Congresswoman from Minnesota, has said some crazy things… All of that provides a solid basis for questioning her as a candidate and wondering whether she’s suited for the Oval Office. But has Bachmann said or done anything more bizarre than some of her opponents, including several who are above her in polling in Iowa?” Not really.

Second, women don’t “look presidential.” Remember when Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen wrote, “I can think of no reason why anyone who, for some unaccountable reason, supports Michele Bachmann will not move over to Perry… Perry, who actually looks like a president …” Women don’t look presidential because we’ve never seen a woman president. And people from Iowa (as well as Mississippi) have never elected a woman to their congressional delegation or as governor.  My state of Massachusetts has never elected a woman senator or governor. And the list goes on leaving the Unites States ranking 40th in the world for women’s political empowerment.

Third, the media skews the news. We knew this when Hillary Clinton ran for president. Now we have data to prove it. Paul Bedard, also at U.S. News recently wrote, “Two new scholarly studies that blow the whistle on the industry’s lopsided reliance on male reporters find that the media first belittled (Hillary Clinton’s) effort against Barack Obama, then jumped the gun to push her out of the race earlier than any other recent strong primary challenger.” Remember Bachman’s Newsweek cover photo? Case in point.

One could argue, as a conservative, Bachmann faced a greater challenge than a liberal candidate. As Amanda Marcotte wrote for Reuters, “As a conservative female politician with an evangelical base, Bachmann was forced to hang her ambitions on voters who believe in traditional gender roles. …The problems arise when anti-feminist women start to seek real power for themselves. …That base is unable to grant serious power to a woman, no matter how much she promised to use it to disempower other women.”

Patricia Murphy quotes two such women in The Washington Post. “Jeanne Jennings of Johnston, Iowa, for instance, said Tuesday night that she likes Bachmann very much indeed, but chose to caucus for Rick Santorum instead. ‘I was for Michele Bachmann for a long time. I read her book. Wonderful book, wonderful family, wonderful person,” Jennings said. “But then I just started thinking about being presidential and I don’t know that we’re ready for a woman for president. I think what we really need to do is get Rick Santorum for president and Michele Bachmann for vice president.’” And, “Georgiana Cleveland from Boone, Iowa, said the same: ‘I guess maybe we here are not quite ready for a women president.’”

Penny Nance, CEO and President of Concerned Women for America, wrote about why she backed Santorum at FOXNews.com “Michele Bachmann was a serious candidate, a fierce competitor, and an excellent communicator. She made everyone in the race better, because she made them define their conservative credentials. This wasn’t her year, but mark my words, her day will come.” When?

After Martha Coakley lost the Massachusetts Senate seat to Scott Brown last winter Politico reported on the unions’ response to her candidacy, “Massachusetts labor leaders expressed frustration at the anti-woman bias in their ranks. ‘I’m not voting for the broad’ is the message Teamster leader Robert Cullinane told POLITICO he’s hearing.” With men like that, we need women to rally.

Whether you are conservative, moderate or liberal, electing women needs to be a priority because:

  • Women are 51 percent of the population but only 17 percent of Congress and that’s not representative government.
  • Last year, 1,100 pieces of legislation about women’s reproductive health were introduced — by a majority male legislative body.
  • And our daughters, who we promise can grow up and be anything they want, need to see what they want to be. Where are their role models?

In The Hello Ladies Guide to Sexism in Politics, we talk about why sexism in matters:

Sexism hurts. A 2010 poll by Lake Research Partners revealed that “even mild sexist language has an impact on voters’ likelihood to vote for a female candidate and on how favorable they feel toward a woman seeking office.” The Inter-Parliamentary Union, an organization whose mission is to establish representative democracy across the globe, sees gender parity as the path to democracy stating, “The concept of democracy will only assume true and dynamic significance when political policies and national legislation are decided upon jointly by men and women with equitable regard for the interests and aptitudes of both halves of the population.”

So what do we do?

  • We need to call out sexism when we see it. Organizations like Name It Change It allow people to report sexist coverage and then call on the media outlets to change behavior.
  • We need to contribute to and volunteer on women’s campaigns. It takes a lot of money and people to get someone elected.
  • We need to lose the phrase, I want to support a woman candidate but….,” and vote for women if they are qualified AND support women’s rights.
  • We need to run for office.  Organizations like She Should Run, The White House Project, The 2012 Project and Ready to Run offer support and coaching for women seeking office. If not you, then who?

 

 

Senator Brown’s Locker Room Response to Elizabeth Warren

October 6, 2011
By
Senator Brown

Senator Brown

Senator Scott Brown resorted to a locker room-style response this morning on a local Boston radio station when speaking about Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren.

Earlier in the week, during a Democratic primary debate, Warren was asked how she paid her tuition. Alluding to Senator Scott Brown’s Cosmopolitan photo shoot she said, “I kept my clothes on.”

This morning, the radio show host asked Brown, “Have you officially responded to Elizabeth Warren’s comment about how she didn’t take her clothes off?” To which the Senator responded, “Thank God,” then he and the host laughed like teenagers.

We weren’t thrilled when we heard Warren’s comment during the debate. We’d prefer she stay on the high road. However, while Warren referenced Brown’s actions, the  Senator referenced his challenger’s appearance. His comment was low.

Was it sexist? Perhaps the “Blink-and-you-might-miss-it“ variety. Taken alone, what Brown said could be viewed as just immature and not very savvy. But couple it with previous campaign behavior – with his silence on the campaign trail in 2010 when a supporter suggested shoving a curling iron in then opponent Martha Coakley - and it stinks.

Read The Hello Ladies Guide to Sexism in Politics here.

 

 

Photo from Medill DC used with a Creative Commons License


The Hello Ladies Guide to Sexism in Politics

August 18, 2011
By
Political attack ad against Janice Hahn

The latest presidential election cycle has only just begun and already we are engaged in some lively discussions about the sexist treatment of candidate Michele Bachmann. Was the Newsweek cover photo of the Congresswoman and the accompanying headline sexist? Was the “submissive wife” question out of line?  Sexism may seem more out in front during a presidential campaign but it exists in politics all the time – and at the state and local level too. Some of the sexism is over the top, and some not so obvious. To help you easily identify and respond to unfair treatment of female politicians, here is “The Hello Ladies Guide to Sexism in Politics.”

Overt sexism: In this category we have the outrageous remarks that make you scream, “How does this person (insert name of person who spoke or wrote the sexist comment) keep their job?!” Examples: Conan O’Brien sidekick Andy Richter’s recent tweet that read, “There’s nothing wrong with Michele Bachmann that two solid weeks of orgasms won’t cure.” Statements like that one attempt to reduce a female candidate to a shrew, a sexual object, anything but a viable contender for the job. An Alex Beam column in The Boston Globe during the Massachusetts Senate race last year qualified because it shifted the focus, even if only briefly, from Attorney General Martha Coakley’s front-runner status to her looks. And, of course, the web ad depicting Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn as a pole dancer was one of the most offensive displays of sexism in politics we’ve seen.

Subtle sexism: This is the kind of sexism that doesn’t necessarily jump off the page but still reveals and perpetuates entrenched attitudes that women don’t belong in Washington. Examples: Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen writing, “I can think of no reason why anyone who, for some unaccountable reason, supports Michele Bachmann will not move over to Perry… Perry, who actually looks like a president … will raise far more money and breeze by her.” Because presidents, ladies, don’t look like us. They look like white guys. And to be clear,  political leaders don’t care about frivolous things like makeup and jewelry either. That was the message in an attack ad against North Carolina Senate candidate Margaret Dickson. Because after all, women who wear lipstick might gasp or cough when a terrorist is killed. Yes, the analysis of Secretary of State Clinton in the situation room during the Osama Bin Laden raid was sexist. And the other things legislators are not: mothers, or, women with no children. Sarah Palin had too many kids and  Tampa mayoral candidate Rosa Ferlita didn’t have enough. An attack ad against her implied she was unfit for office unlike her opponent, “a family man.”

Blink-and-you-might-miss-it sexism: From a very young age, we’ve been conditioned by the media to view women a certain way. Think Barbie with her physically impossible figure, models airbrushed into Everyman’s fantasy, Wilma Flinstone – tough but obedient, and Daphne and Velma – pretty or smart but never both. So we don’t always immediately see sexism for what it is because the images served up of female politicians follow the same formula we’ve always seen when it comes to the portrayal of women in the media. Examples: Fox News correspondent Greta Van Susteren asking then Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin if she had breast implants – not relevant to U.S. policy but a topic we’re used to having about women in the news. Another example was Rep. Allen West telling Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz she’s “not a lady.” Because a well-behaved lady doesn’t challenge a man (but we do, don’t we ladies?). And then there’s the use of our least-favorite phrase “Man Up.”  Because it’s men who win wars, fix economies and create jobs. Clearly.

Why it Matters: Sexism hurts. A 2010 poll by Lake Research Partners revealed that “even mild sexist language has an impact on voters’ likelihood to vote for a female candidate and on how favorable they feel toward a woman seeking office.” The Inter-Parliamentary Union, an organization whose mission is to establish representative democracy across the globe, sees gender parity as the path to democracy stating, “The concept of democracy will only assume true and dynamic significance when political policies and national legislation are decided upon jointly by men and women with equitable regard for the interests and aptitudes of both halves of the population.” But here in the U.S. women hold barely 17 percent of the seats in Congress, despite making up half the population.

What We Can Do About It: We can start by calling out sexism when we see it. Organizations like Name It Change It allow people to report sexist coverage and then call on the media outlets to change behavior. We can tell advertisers and sponsors we don’t like it, that we notice where they spend advertising dollars and that we too must think about how we spend our money.

And we can work to shift the political landscape. We can contribute to and volunteer on women’s campaigns. It takes a lot of money and people to get someone elected. We can vote for women. I often quote Gloria Feldt who says, “… when there are two candidates–one male and one female–who are both well-qualified and represent my positions on major issues I care about, I will support the woman until such time as women have our fair 50 percent share of the elected official slots. Then and only then will gender not matter.” And we can run for office.  Organizations like She Should Run, The White House Project, The 2012 Project and Ready to Run offer support and coaching for women seeking office.

And eventually, we too will look like a president.

Like what you’ve read? Then sign up here to receive future posts by email or RSS.

2010 Political Review (Slideshow)

December 31, 2010
By

Here is a look back at just a few of the political stories we were talking about in 2010. What do you think 2011 will bring?

Footwear and the Midterm Elections

August 28, 2010
By

Kate Spade "Halle" wedge

Sometimes, I know I like something, but I don’t know why. I could be enjoying a cabernet sauvignon, for example, and then someone with a better palate than mine says, “This is so deep and rich. So many tannins. Do you taste the chocolate?” And bingo! It all becomes clear.

And so it is with politics. For years I thought my interest stemmed from a sense of civic duty, a desire to make the world a better place, from wanting to hold my legislators accountable, demand justice, transparency and equality. But recently it’s become clear to me. I am interested in politics because I love shoes.

Shoes, you see, matter a great deal in politics. The voters in Colorado understand this. They just gave the GOP primary nod to Senate hopeful Ken Buck, the man who said he deserved the vote because he doesn’t wear high heels. He will face Senator Michael Bennet in the general election. Bennet is too frequently photographed from the waist up and so I need to learn more about his footwear. Florsheim? Cole Haan? Gucci? Time will tell.

Senator Michael Bennet

And Bennet should not take this scrutiny lightly. After all, you remember what happened in the Massachusetts Senate race, don’t you? After easily winning the primary, Attorney General Martha Coakley foolishly underestimated her “age-inappropriate Mary Jane shoes” and lost the general election to Scott Brown, who most likely learned the importance of shoes from Helen Gurley Brown.

Congressman Stephen Lynch gets it. He won’t make the same mistakes Coakley did. Not him. Lynch is paying close attention to the message Massachusetts voters sent in January. And that’s why he is touting his footwear as a reason to vote for him, not challenger Mac D’Alessandro. Fashion forecast for fall: red is the new black and work boots are the new barn jacket.

The New York Times gets it. Last week some women were upset about a story in the Times featuring Congress hopeful Reshma Saujani which dedicated half a sentence to her political goals and 13 paragraphs to her shoes. While I think the story should have appeared in the Style section and a separate, more substantive piece on Saujani is owed New York voters, I did find the article informative. Reading it I learned that the 3 inch high, $300 Kate Spade Halle wedge is the footwear of choice for women in politics. Wearing these shoes you can canvass neighborhoods, run to catch a flight and have “drinks at a new hotel lounge with tech entrepreneurs hungry to see their kind in politics.”

I am going to buy a pair. And then I am going to run for office. I may not be a shoo-in to win but I will certainly be a shoe-in.

Six Things We Need to Do to Send a Woman to the White House

July 9, 2010
By


Last week I posted a question at SkinnyScoop: Do you think a woman will be elected president in your lifetime? Most of the respondents (81 percent) said yes. No one answered definitely not. I sure hope the respondents are right, but getting there won’t be easy.

One respondent at SkinnyScoop wrote, “We are ready and there are more of us than them, we just need to get out and vote ladies.” It seems simple. But it’s not. The sad truth is we haven’t moved past the misogyny and sexism we witnessed during Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. Senate hopeful Martha Coakley didn’t do herself any favors when she made some bad campaign decisions last winter but the press didn’t do her many favors either. And the Republicans don’t seem to treat their women much better, as Newsweek recently pointed out.

I remember during Clinton’s presidential run people groaning about the word misogyny. “I’m so sick of feminists talking about misogyny,” friends and coworkers would tell me when I was discussing things Tucker Carlson, Chris Matthews, Glen Beck and Keith Olbermann had said on television the night before. I challenge those same people to come up with a better explanation for Playboy’s recent article (which has been removed from its site) “The Top 10 Conservative Women We Love to Hate” complete with hatef**k ratings for each woman.

The fact is the media can be a brutal place for women in politics and we are far from achieving any kind of critical mass. Women make up only 17 percent of Congress today and only six states have women serving as governor. So, if we are going to put a woman in the White House ladies, we have work to do. Here are six things you can do to make it happen.

1. Contribute. It takes a lot of money to get elected. Just recently, two promising women candidates ended races citing lack of support from their party, the Democrats. Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner lost the primary to Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher and Connie Saltonstall quit the race to replace Michigan’s Congressman Bart Stupak. Saltonstall said she didn’t think she could raise the necessary funds to run without her party’s support.

2. Volunteer. It also takes a lot of people power to run a campaign. Get involved. Too often I hear mother’s in my community tell me they just don’t have the time to get involved because their children need them at home. I tell them my children need me out fighting for the things I believe will secure their future. Your kids will be fine if you spend a few hours at the phone bank. Trust me.

3. Support qualified women candidates. Period. As Gloria Feldt says, “… when there are two candidates–one male and one female–who are both well-qualified and represent my positions major issues I care about, I will support the woman until such time as women have our fair 50% share of the elected official slots. Then and only then will gender not matter.”

4. Start local. Get involved in your local politics and help groom future women leaders.

5. Run. Better yet, why don’t you run for office? Check out She Should Run or attend a Whitehouse Project event for more information and access to support.

6. Vote.

 

And in other news, congratulations to Mary Jo McMenamin who won a Yogi Max from Yogibo for answering our question at The SkinnyScoop.

Are Women to Blame?

June 16, 2010
By

I have recently found a new slew of articles supporting the popular idea that women are to blame –for everything.

Politico ran an article earlier this week citing research from American University’s Women & Politics Institute that shows only 13.5 percent of the lawmaker guests on the Sunday morning talk shows are women. (We referenced a similar statistic several months ago.) According to Politico, the show producers say part of the reason they feature so few women is “the shows must be topical.” Women represent slightly more than half of the country’s population. I would have thought women lawmakers could discuss topical issues.

But according to the article the producers also say, “Some congressional women — Nancy Pelosi chief among them — do not help the cause by making themselves so difficult to book. Most producers say they try to recruit female lawmakers nearly every weekend but receive a steady stream of rejection slips.”

Pelosi’s spokeswomen, in her defense, is quoted in the piece as saying  the speaker’s travel schedule makes it difficult for her to appear but there are plenty of other women who would make good guests. Those other women, however, at least according to one producer quoted in the story, “have other things to do.”

You see, its women’s fault, and especially Nancy Pelosi’s fault, that they aren’t appearing as guests. Women, have other things to do.

Women are also blamed for the fact 90 percent of venture funding flows to men, even though data from the Center for Women’s Business Research cites 41 percent of private companies in the U.S. are women-owned.

I read a number of articles and blog posts this week on the topic and even though they all pointed out the challenges women face in the venture capital world:

- women are stereotyped as less likely to do what it takes to make a business succeed and more likely to seek work/life balance

- funders tend to fund in their image (white males from top schools)

- it’s tough for women to break into male-dominated networks and build relationships with the men who have access to the money,

the commenters dismissed these points and blamed women. “Women don’t get funded because they don’t ask,” was a common retort.

You can see that same idea play out in discussions about women in the workplace. The “blame women” theme is not new. It has been a popular one in discussions about why women are still missing from boardrooms in any significant way.  Headlines like this one from MSNBC, “Study: Women create ‘their own glass ceilings’” go right at it. The articles cites a study from the University of New Mexico Anderson School of Management, that shows women managers are three times more likely to underrate their bosses’ opinions of them while men overrate how their bosses view them.

Interpreting this data as women constructing the glass ceiling is quite a leap, but it’s a leap that many make when discussing the wage gap too. That women still earn, on average, just .77 cents for every dollar a man doing comparable work earns, is frequently attributed to women’s poor negotiation skills, women’s choice of shifts they work, women’s desire to have families.

While it may be popular and convenient to blame women for the gender gaps in the media, at work, and everywhere else they exist, it’s also lazy and irresponsible. Lazy because anecdotes and excuses avoid the systemic issues that need to be addressed in the American workplace such as attracting and retaining a diverse workforce, removing gender bias from performance reviews, establishing networks and mentoring programs for women, and work/life programs to support working parents. Irresponsible because there is plenty of data – from Catalyst,  Ernst & Young, McKinsey & Company, Pepperdine and Columbia Universities for example -  all showing a correlation between women in management and strong corporate performance. And in today’s shaky economic times, we should all be pulling for healthy corporations.

On a more personal level, women need to be aware of how the excuse mentality affects their individual careers. For me, it shows up in a number of different ways. Last year during the special election to fill Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat, I wrote an op-ed on why women should support a smart, women candidate. While I didn’t name names, Martha Coakley was the only women in the race. The editor at my local paper told me he liked the piece but he couldn’t run something that clearly endorsed one candidate over the others. I responded I would be happy to rewrite the piece to endorse all of the women in the race. When I pitched the business editor of a major metro daily newspaper on a story about the challenges caregivers face at work, he told me he had already covered women that month.

Several years ago, I worked at a company where the CEO had a policy that the vice president title was only given to those of us who managed teams. I was the only female VP on the management team. The other three women held the title director. Two of them didn’t manage staff and one of them managed one employee. There were three male VPs, not on the management team but in the organization, who had no direct reports. The CEO’s excuse: a better title gave them credibility and helped them do their jobs.

One of my female employees was doing an outstanding job, taking on increasing responsibility, training other employees and aggressively cutting business expenses. I scheduled a meeting with the CEO to discuss her career path and growth plan. He cut the meeting short telling me there was no growth plan for employees without bachelor degrees. She had dropped out of college. A few months later, I learned that the VP of Sales, a man promoted into the position by the CEO and reporting directly to him, never went to college.

In this situation I was smart enough not to storm the CEO’s office or the HR department demanding explanations for these inequities, but I found it helpful to be clued in to the realities of the situation and the stories the CEO spun to maintain the status quo. That way before I met with him to discuss raises, promotions and new assignments I could anticipate any roadblocks and try to work around them. And, I could eventually decide to leave the company.

Pay attention to the number of men vs. women among the talking heads on television and the bylines on the opinion pages of the newspaper. Listen for the handy excuses you hear at work. It’s not easy to change the status quo but it’s not impossible either. Add your comments online, write letters to the editor and prepare like hell before your next performance review. Ladies, despite what you may read or hear, everything is not your fault.

Woman in Politics: Harmony Wu

May 25, 2010
By

Harmony Wu

Since we’re always urging women to get involved politically, we thought it would be informative to share insights from a woman who is. Last week I sat down with Harmony Wu, a political activist in Needham, Massachusetts to find out what motivates her to do what she does.

I first heard of Wu when I worked on the Martha Coakley for U.S. Senate campaign. Volunteers at the phone bank I managed would come in every night and say, “You need to meet Harmony. You should really meet Harmony.”

Fast forward to the healthcare vote and our induction of Congressman Stephen Lynch into the Ignorant Male Legislator’s club. We posted a job opening for someone to take his place in the Ninth Congressional  district; someone who would represent the district and lead with courage and integrity. Later that same day, we heard Harmony Wu was considering a run for the seat.

After some serious consideration, Wu decided not to run, posting this statement on her website:

Over the last two weeks, I have met with numerous people to address the many aspects of a potential campaign against Mr. Lynch. The ability to maintain my family life during the campaign and as a member of Congress has always been an important factor for me, as it has been for so many women seeking and serving in office. In my case, it prevents me from launching what would be a vigorous campaign and if elected, committing to a life that would require far too much time away from family at this moment in our lives. In the end, this is the decisive factor for me.

I admit I was slightly disappointed that Wu cited family life not just as a factor in her decision, but as a factor for other women considering political life. I understand family first. I do. And in her shoes I may have reached the same decision. I just don’t want to see all women painted with the same broad brush stroke. I don’t buy into the idea that maintaining and preserving the family unit is a woman’s job. I believe it is a parent’s job and should be based on the individual, not the gender. Just like running for office should be an individual decision, not a gender decision.

Fast forward again. I finally met Harmony Wu and she opened up about her decision-making process.  And what she had to say about the prospects for women in politics is a fair and unsurprising commentary from someone who took a close look.

Wu wasn’t always politically active. But observing the Bush administration inspired her to get involved in the last presidential election. “I swore I would do everything in my power to do more,” she says and after the primary she volunteered for the Obama campaign with Organizing for America.

After the presidential election, Wu worked on a local Selectman’s campaign but wasn’t active on a  day-to-day-basis. “Then Ted Kenendy passed away,” she says. And things in Massachusetts changed. Wu went from the Senate race to the race to fill Scott Brown’s State Senator seat. Both candidate’s she supported  lost, but she wasn’t deterred.

In fact her energy and organizing skills attracted attention and Wu was drafted to run against Lynch. “I spent a lot of time exploring, talking to people. There was a lot of support and people telling me, ‘We’ll do what we can.’ But there were also people saying I wasn’t an insider, I had no experience and asking me if I could raise money.”

Wu says her ability to raise money was always the first question asked of her, although for her, the number one question was could she do the job. In the end, she determined that job, one that requires constant fundraising, was not for her.

I asked Wu if, based on what she saw up close, a woman could get elected in Massachusetts? “You know there’s a woman thing, but also a regular person thing,” she says. “Unless you’re on a path to be Guy Smiley from the day you’re born, it’s tough to break in. There’s a gate, a barrier. The lifestyle is different. It’s not family friendly.

“It’s the professionalizing of politics. You have to be in it — in training. It’s been made so unattractive. Massachusetts politics… it’s a tough club.”

Still, Wu believes there’s a “huge pent up desire” to see a woman elected, at least in the more progressive communities.  And she is by no means backing down. She isn’t running for Congress but she is supporting Mac D’Alessandro in his primary bid against Lynch, tearing up the Twitter on the #mapoli hashtag and organizing her neighbors at Yes We Can Needham.  Wu won’t hold an elected office any time soon, but she will hold those in office accountable. And if you’re a progressive woman looking to run, Wu’s probably got your back.

REMINDER: We are giving away a print from Carolyn Draws. Leave a comment and we’ll enter you in our contest.

Stop the Rape Culture (TRIGGER WARNING)

January 25, 2010
By

(TRIGGER WARNING) A woman was raped last week in Toledo, Ohio on the side of busy street in broad daylight.  A high school student approached her as she was walking down the street and threatened her with a pair of scissors. Cars drove by and several beeped. One witness called 911 but no one stopped. According to the local police, some witnesses thought the act was consensual and some may not have comprehended what they were seeing. How could they have? This is not supposed to happen in a  civilized society.

Late last year, we were shocked and frightened by the gang rape of a high school girl outside a school dance in Richmond, California. Now we are sickened by a rapist brazen enough to attack out in the open in broad daylight.

(Trigger warning) Over at Shakesville, there is an excellent piece on rape culture – what it is and what contributes to it. I’ve linked to it before. Again, if you can read it, I recommend it.

I thought I was done writing about the Senate election in Massachusetts, but as I reread Melissa McEwan’s piece at Shakesville, I couldn’t help but reflect on our new Senator-elect.

During the last weekend of the campaign, someone at a rally for Scott Brown yelled out a suggestion for Brown’s opponent Attorney General Martha Coakley, “Shove a curling iron up her butt,” yelled the unseen man. You can watch the video here.  Brown asserts he did not hear the comment. But he certainly heard about it after the fact and he never expressed any outrage. That is rape culture.

A rape takes place every two minutes in this country. One in three women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime. Who is going to reverse this trend? Certainly not the politician who sees no need to decry public outbursts suggesting sodomy.  Victims should not be held accountable for stopping rape. Rapists, public safety officials and our elected leaders must be held accountable.

And since I plan to stop writing about the election, I want to get this off my chest too. Senator-elect, women are not property.

Why the Hate?

January 21, 2010
By

For the last three months I volunteered my time to the Martha Coakley for Senate campaign. I held signs, made calls, (yes, that was me calling incessantly), canvassed, recruited, tweeted and blogged. Following her loss, I feel much better than I expected I would. Maybe it’s because I know I did all I could to get my candidate elected. Maybe it’s because it feels good to speak up for that which you believe. Maybe it’s because I have seen bigger political disappointments (like the Supreme Court naming George Bush president over Al Gore and then the country electing Bush to a second term). Or maybe it’s because I know, if we were still standing after those eight years, we will still be standing at the end of Senator Brown’s term.

I am not going to engage in post-election quarterbacking. So many others have that covered. But I do want to share what I witnessed on the campaign trail. These experiences were as, if not more, upsetting than the final outcome.

Leading up to the primary, when our group of local volunteers stood out in the cold, holding signs on street corners, most drivers passing by either demonstrated their support with a honk or a thumb’s up, or they ignored us. When we called to ask voters if they would support Martha Coakely, they answered yes, hung up, or responded with a quick, “I’m for Capuano, or Khazei, or Pagliuca.”

After the primary, when we made calls, we started hearing, “I would never vote for her,” or, “No way I’m voting for Coakley.” When we stood out on corners, some drivers would roll down their car windows and yell. “Go Scott Brown,” or “Coakley sucks.”

The #masen Twitter feed, which had been rather sleepy but mostly civil leading up to the primary, was suddenly flooded with #teaparty tweets, some of which contained crude, tasteless comments about Chappaquiddick and Mary Jo Kopechne.

The morning of the election, while holding a sign with two other women outside a polling location (which is also my child’s elementary school,) a man, in a truck,  slowed down, rolled down his window, and yelled to us, “Martha Coakley is a fucking beast.”

At the end of a long day, I was waiting to get results at another polling location. A man, older than me, came in to check the numbers for Scott Brown.  We introduced ourselves and he asked me if I actually liked my candidate, or was I just following party lines. I happen to be an Independent. He was talking to me when I excused myself to read a text from my husband. “Sweetheart,” he said. “You should be at home with him.” Then he proceeded to tell me I was a Socialist and I wouldn’t be happy until I turned the country into Sweden. Sweden, according to this man, is a country of “lard asses” who are lazy and don’t produce anything. Usually I try not to use one data point to describe an entire country. But I asked this man if he had ever been to Sweden. He had not. I have. In fact, I went to tour a manufacturing facility, and was impressed by the innovation I saw there.

Just as I was wondering what Sweden had to do with the Massachusetts special election, he brought the conversation back to Coakley.

“She is stupid,” he said.

“Actually, I think she is quite smart,” I responded.

“Stupid, stupid, stupid.”

“I disagree.”

“She doesn’t even know who Curt Schilling is.”
“I don’t care if my Senator can name the 2002 starting lineup for the Red Sox,” I said.

“She is STUPID.”

At that point the polling warden came over to share the results with us. I took out my notebook and pen and wrote them down. My Brown counterpart looked around for something to write on and then said, “You are going to write them down for me too, aren’t you?”

“No.”

“You’re not?” He seemed surprised.

“No.”

You really won’t help me?” He seemed shocked.

“No. I came prepared with a  paper and pen. You did not. Who’s stupid now?”

It was that exchange, and the man swearing at me from his truck, that had me more depressed than the final results. So much rudeness. So much hate. And that, is what prevailed in this election.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes