What needs to be fixed is the cultural expectation of what constitutes "women's work" and the even more fundamental notions of women's autonomy and women's worth.
Exactly. Thanks for the links, Christina, I hadn't seen those.
Posted by iamcoyote at May 19, 2008 05:24 AMI was looking at comments at another blog yesterday re: the fury of many Hillary supporters toward "sweetie" and his supporters. One person mentioned that this campaign season has seen much sexism, that when called out, generates a response of "whiner," while racism is found under every rock, ohmigod, ohmigod. Yeah, we have a ways to go.
Posted by Sharon at May 19, 2008 06:14 AMYeah, we have a ways to go.
Yep. Apparently, the "sweetie" thing is part of an ingrained pattern that he can't be bothered to try to correct, since Obama called Barbara Boxer "cutie" last year at a fundraiser and has used similar diminutives on the campaign trail. But in a world where Mike Tyson, convicted rapist, gets a standing ovation at Cannes, it's par for the course. Which makes it all the more annoying that we're hearing threats from (mostly men) on the left that unless we don't start supporting Obama right now, we're gonna lose Roe v Wade. So, uh, it's not really a value of yours, eh, guys, just another lever to keep the wimmins in line? But don't worry, I'm sure they'll rediscover their umbrage when the GOP and the media start attacking Michele's hair, clothes, manner. Sexism's only evil when it's used against women we like.
Posted by iamcoyote at May 19, 2008 07:59 AMThanks for this post, Christina. I am glad to have found your columns. I'm also a female academic scientist (evolutionary biology). One of the greatest disappointments of my life was when I found that men in science and academia - almost all liberal, progressive, highly educated -were no less sexist than men anywhere else. Apparently there is no cure. I've been at plenty of scientific society meetings where guys show slides of naked women during their talks (yuk, yuk), talk like construction workers, and harass graduate students; I've seen female scientists glossed over repeatedly and ignored when it comes to inclusion in symposia, panels, etc; and I've watched too many female scientists leave their tenure-track positions due to all this after all the hard work of graduate school and finding an academic position. Lots and lots of dropouts.
The misogyny that Hillary Clinton has suffered during this campaign, and the complete silence or denial of many on the left on this issue (including many, many commenters here) has driven this point home to me yet again unfortunately. I was no Clinton fan politically, but what an ugly picture emerged about sexism during this campaign - it is simply no better on the left than the right on this issue. In fact, frankly, at this point, I feel that I can take it a little better from the right wing - at least you know exactly what you're dealing with there, rather than the same old shit wrapped in a veneer of 'progressive'.
What's so much worse than the actual sexist onslaught towards Hillary are the deniers - all those guys asking innocently 'what sexism?' or 'it's not towards other women, it's just that Hillary deserves it'. Riiiiight. I'm sure they will be cluttering up this thread with their crap soon.
Posted by Anon at May 19, 2008 08:39 AMWhat's so much worse than the actual sexist onslaught towards Hillary are the deniers - all those guys asking innocently 'what sexism?
This is a textbook symptom of privilege. The same can be said about racism, ableism, and so on.
The first step in moving forward, I think, is recognizing our own place (complicity, benefits) in the power structure. For example, I have "white" European ancestors and my parents are well educated, giving me certain benefits not available to others. This doesn't mean I should disown these things or my own hard work but I should be conscious of them. When we can examine our own roles, honestly and openly, then we can begin to examine the origins, institutional mechanisms, and legacies of various forms of discrimination.
Of course, people have to be willing to engage in this process. How we get there as a society, well, I have some ideas but I won't claim to have any answers. I do know that I need to keep my own house in order. It's not enough for me to not be racist, I need to do the work to be anti-racist. By the same score, no man should consider himself a supporter of women just because he's not a rapist. It's no short row to hoe, to be an ally to somebody else. It's no short row to hoe, this business of liberty and justice for all.
Melissa has a running series on this kind of stuff - anything about women is shoved into the the fashion/style section, or even worse, the Odd News sections. 'Cos women are sooo weird, dontcha know.
Posted by iamcoyote at May 19, 2008 10:20 AMFascinating analysis. Just as a point of contrast, consider the Intel International Science and Engineering Festival, held last week in Atlanta-- fully 47% of the entrants were female. And of the three grand prize winners...
100% were female.
Wow, Leslie, your sample size of 3 at a single event is, like, really compelling as a point of contrast to this analysis.
Posted by Anon at May 19, 2008 07:55 PMThe Intel Science & Engineering Fair is a big deal and the fair in Atlanta was a culminating event for students who competed at the regional and state level to get there. (I've been a judge and a friend is a state-level coordinator.) It's a good metric of what students can achieve, given resources and support.
Girls do compete well in science fairs. Girls perform well in science and math classes too. The issue is why, then, are women so few & far between at the professional level?
Posted by Christina at May 19, 2008 10:23 PM@Anon, 47% of 1500 ain't bad and 100% of the top 3 is IMHO, kinda awesome. There were so many gals that rocked in the top prize categories as well. Including a 1st place finalist in the categories of Physics and Chemistry from New Mexico who had been working on a Rubik's Cube during the awards ceremony.
@Christina, you raise an excellent point (and it is super awesome that you are involved; I was there as well, we may have passed one another in the long aisles illustrated by fellow blogger Shelbinator ).
I think about this often, but mainly come back to what I learned in econ. Women take time off to be mothers, so they are often routed to different vocations that allow for a loss of time or skill (i.e., it is hard to stay on the cutting edge of technology if you leave for a while, but it is easier to be in the communications field).
I wonder if that is the whole story and if perhaps the tides will ever turn?
All I can say is that when all three winners were announced as women, I did a little dance inside. You go girls.
Posted by Leslie at May 20, 2008 02:27 PM