politics

Like others who work in education, I was eager to see who President-elect Obama would select for his Education Secretary, and what that individual would represent. Obama’s selection of Chicago school superintendent Arne Duncan was announced yesterday.

I am heartened by the fact that Duncan represents a both-and approach to school reform, recognizing that both teacher improvement and social support for children outside of school will play a critical role in taking the US education system to a new level of excellence (we can hope, right?).

But I’m left with an important question: Will we see federal leadership for curricular reform? Peggy McIntosh recently pointed out to me that the central structure of the American education system (math, science, English, social studies, etc.) has remained unchanged since the 18th century. To be sure, approaches to these subjects are updated and the curriculum has certainly changed over time. Yet I’m also convinced from experience that the more things change the more they stay the same, and that the status quo reinforces traditional gender stereotypes (along with stereotypes about race and class).

For example, I noticed that my daughter’s kindergarten teacher had divided the girls’ and boys’ workbooks by color-coded baskets (red=girls, blue=boys: hm, at least it wasn’t pink!). I notice when I pick my daughter up from her after-school program that the room is frequently segregated by gender and toys (girls playing with dolls while boys play with Legos).

No doubt you’ve noticed that my examples point to classroom arrangements rather than classroom content, and you might think I’m being too nit-picky. After all, they’re just colored baskets, right? No way! I’m convinced that the classroom arrangements and curricular content reinforce each other (see my previous post where I mention a sex-stereotyping book series that my daughter discovered thanks to her first-grade teacher). It may be red baskets now, but when women still have to fight for equal pay for equal work (among other things), I want to be sure I’ve done my part to make a difference.

When I mentioned my concerns about the color-coded baskets during a conference, my daughter’s kindergarten teacher was shocked to think that she might be perpetuating gender stereotyping. She gave me examples of ways she challenged the students’ gender stereotyping in the classroom (talking about her own love of math, “requiring” girls to play in the block corner). The next morning the baskets were changed, with the kids finding their workbooks based upon the first initial of their last name.
I’m sure that won’t be the last conversation I have with a teacher about gender inequality in the classroom, but I hope that we can expect national leadership and fresh thinking about what goes on in the classroom. Any word on whether Duncan is a feminist? And GWP readers, have you taken any steps to make your sons’ or daughters’ classrooms more feminist learning environments?

-Allison Kimmich

Back from a little Thanksgiving break, we bring you today Family Stories, the monthly column from Jacqueline Hudak.  Still stunned, energized, and moved, I think we’ll all be processing Obama’s victory for a long while. -Deborah

As GWP readers know, I am fascinated by which stories are told in our culture, which remain silenced, and what conditions bring certain ones to the fore. I often say my work as a family therapist entails listening to stories – stories that either cannot be spoken or heard outside of my office.  From the personal to the cultural, it’s often not a great leap.

As so brilliantly documented in a book by a former history prof of mine at BU, (A People’s History of the United States: 1492 to Present), Howard Zinn presents history through the eyes of those rarely heard in mainstream texts.  I was reminded of this the other week when my friend Trina Scordo, a longtime union organizer, began to tell stories she heard in North Carolina as she knocked on doors for the Obama campaign as the election approached. Trina asked one of her fellow union members why he chose to travel from New York to Charlotte for this election eve.  He told Trina that his father had said there would never be an African-American president in the United States.  He said, “My Father always told me racism was too strong.  My grandparents were slaves and my father faced racism on his job and in the neighborhood in which we lived.  My Dad always tried to avoid the discussion of race because he did not believe it would ever change.  He died believing that.  I had to be here on this day, on this night for him.”  When Barack Obama surpassed 270 electoral votes, Trina told me, this gentleman fell to his knees and wept.  He held in his hand a picture of his father.

Other stories came from those on the other side of the doors.  As Trina said, “African-Americans shared their histories with organizers at their front doors and porches.  It was a collective history of slavery, civil rights and unions.  Some told me it was the first time they had shared this history outside of their families and further, with a white person.”

This election gave a sense of liberation to the marginalized: youth, women, communities of color, the exploited and working class.  Yet it was a bittersweet victory – a victory tinged with sadness about the passage of California’s Prop 8. I asked in my column last month: How do we fill the gap between what we wanted and what we get in this election?

I found an analysis of the breakdown of who voted for Prop 8 at Pam’s House Blend, one that did not engage in racial scapegoating.   Hendrik Hertzberg (New Yorker, Dec 1) points to the tens of thousands of people who took to the streets all over this country in spontaneous protest, and believes “It wasn’t enough this time. But the time is coming.”

In the afterword of the young readers version of A People’s History, Howard Zinn asks youth to “imagine the American people united for the first time in a movement for fundamental change.”

We are on the cusp of such a movement.  May it be so.

—Jacqueline Hudak

What Will Hillary Do? The latest:

Ted Kennedy Asks Hillary Clinton To Head Senate Healthcare Team
11/19/08
LA Times: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y), considered a prominent contender to become secretary of State in the Obama administration, was offered an alternative Tuesday — to be a senior member of the Senate team aiming to overhaul the nation’s healthcare system.

Why Obama Wants Hillary for His ‘Team of Rivals’
11/20/08
Time: As he wrapped up his second week as President-elect, it was clear that Obama was taking the long view in both diplomacy and politics. How else to explain the fact that he had all but offered the most prestigious job in his Cabinet to a woman whose foreign policy experience he once dismissed as consisting of having tea with ambassadors?

And while we’re on the subject of Cabinet appointments:

Will Tom Daschle Be The Secretary Of HHS The Reproductive Rights Community Wants?
11/19/08
RH Reality Check: Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle’s record on reproductive and sexual health and rights is a mixed one.

One of the most exciting things coming off of election night was watching gangs of teenagers running through my neighborhood banging pots and cheering about Obama’s win. I’d never seen anything like it. Courtney’s here to talk concretely about the youth turnout in this election and what that may mean for the future of American politics. –Kristen

There was a lot of skepticism leading up to the election about young people. Many pundits talked about the usual pattern regarding youth enthusiasm about politics…it starts out with a bang and ends with a whimper. In other words, young people usually talk a big game, but then don’t actually show up to the polls in expected numbers.

Well this year was different. Plain and simple. Pew Research Center has just released a report titled, Young Voters in the 2008 Election and it’s chock-full of exciting news about the ways in which young people walked their talk this unprecedented election season. Some of the highlights:

• This year, 66% of those under age 30 voted for Barack Obama making the disparity between young voters and other age groups larger than in any presidential election since exit polling began in 1972.

• Among voters ages 18-29, a 19-point gap now separates Democratic party affiliation (45%) and Republican affiliation (26%).

• Just 62% of voters age 18-29 identify as white, while 18% are black and 14% Hispanic. Four years ago, this age group was 68% white. In 2000, nearly three-quarters (74%) of young voters were white.

There is all sorts of intriguing data coming out of the November 4th showing of young people, but perhaps most exciting is the inkling that a whole generation is shifting left like never before. There is real evidence that young people who have been galvanized by an Obama presidency are poised to concretize a real, solid progressive youth movement.

I’ve written about this before, but it bears saying again. In order to capitalize on the exciting youth movement that has been ignited by Obama’s presidency, progressives need to put some serious money behind a youth-directed, Democratic political machine. It’s as if we’ve all been given a golden opportunity—an inspiring leader who understood the importance of grassroots and netroots organizing. Now it’s time to run with our blessing.

Word on the street is that The American Prospect Online is working on a big story on how to transfer the Obama enthusiasm into a sustainable youth movement. Stay tuned for the link and analysis…

–Courtney Martin

This just in: The Daily Beast released a poll this morning that reveals the depth of women’s anger in the aftermath of Hilary Clinton’s and Sarah Palin’s campaigns. “The Barrier That Didn’t Fall” (downloadable) summarizes and analyzes survey results from 1,000 U.S. voters, coming on the high heels of “the first-ever presidential election with two high profile women candidates who ran but did not win.”

The stats:

• By an overwhelming 61% to 19% margin, women believe there is a gender bias in the media.
• 4 in 10 men freely admit sexist attitudes towards a female president. 39% of men say that a male is “naturally more suited” to carrying out the duties of the office
• Only 20% of women polled are willing to use the word “feminist” about themselves. Only 17% said they would welcome their daughters using that label.
• 48% of women thought Hillary Clinton received fair media treatment and only 29% believed Sarah Palin was treated fairly. In contrast, nearly 8 in 10 voters thought the press gave fair treatment to Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
• More than two-thirds of women said they were being treated unfairly in the workplace (68%)

In the words of a very articulate dear friend of mine: BLURGH.

(Thanks to Anna for the heads up.)

Courtesy, as ever, Rebekah at WMC:

For Women, It’s Not The Gender, It’s The Agenda

11/14/08

Boston Globe: While all eyes were focused on Palin and the “Sarah-centric” (her words) crowds that turned out for her rallies, there was a quieter “women’s story” in this race that may make the doorway a little narrow.

Summers May Be Off Of Treasury Short List

11/13/08

Politico.com: Intense backlash from women’s groups may have pushed former Clinton Treasury Secretary Larry Summers off the short-list to lead Treasury for President-elect Barack Obama, according to widespread reports circulating in Democratic circles.

Hillary Clinton Emerges As State Dept Candidate

11/14/08

Boston Globe: Sen. Hillary Clinton emerged on Thursday as a candidate to be U.S. secretary of state for Barack Obama, months after he defeated her in an intense contest for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Women Gaining Political Power

11/13/08

CNN: “Women are about 54 percent of the vote,” CNN contributor Hilary Rosen said. “Do we have equal representation? No. Are we closer to it? Yes.”

POLITICS-US: Feminists Say The Work Has Just Begun

11/13/08

IPS: Women’s right activists see an open door to the White House of President-elect Barack Obama, and they plan to walk right in and take a seat.

This afternoon, a guest post from Amanda Marie Gengler, Visiting Assistant Professor in the School of Behavioral Sciences at Barton College in Wilson, NC. Here’s Amanda! -Deborah

While the election is over (hooray!) and we are at least temporarily saved, as Judith Warner wrote, from the “specter of Sarah Palin” as VP (or worse), her meteoric rise over the past 2 months is a stark reminder that we have a long way to go in gender and politics. Tuesday morning Palin appeared on the Today Show; back home, back in her kitchen, deftly navigating between the fridge, dishwasher, and countertop as she chatted with Matt Lauer and mashed food for the baby.

Some had suggested that the selection of Sarah Palin as McCain’s running mate represented a strange milestone for women: the one where mediocre women can achieve the same success as mediocre men. For years unexceptional men have easily attained exceptional positions, while exceptional women have struggled to do so. So why doesn’t Sarah Palin mark this feminist “victory”?

Because Palin is exceptional in the area a woman must most be: her femininity. While Hillary Clinton was derided for her pantsuits and her age, Palin’s background as a beauty queen, a mother of five, and her lavish wardrobe of fitted skirts and stylish heels (eagerly subsidized by the RNC) remind us that whatever other assets a woman may possess, her proper gender performance trumps them all. A quintessential femininity is the highest card in the deck. While McCain’s motivations were likely complex, it would be difficult to argue that if the photos and biographies that accompany Sarah Palin and Kay Bailey Hutchison were reversed, his choice would have been the same. He rightly guessed that her smile, figure, and photogenic family would resonate with an American public still deeply invested in traditional and essentialist views of gender.

Yet we are to believe that the highest aims of feminism have been realized when a VP candidate can be deemed “hot” by Alec Baldwin on Saturday Night Live, and lusted after by male voters across the nation. We are again reminded, in 2008, that if we are not properly plucked, pinned, coiffed, rouged, and of course, lip-sticked, we may risk our very professional lives. It seems after all, that those exceptional “true” women–the ones who manage to be maternal enough, to smile enough, to stay slim enough, and to keep all the obligatory feminine balls in the air (never missing a deadline, a diaper change, or a bikini wax)–set the bar today’s girls are to strive for.

Funny how “progress” can look so much like the past.

–Amanda Marie Gengler is a Visiting Assistant Professor in the School of Behavioral Sciences at Barton College in Wilson, NC.

GWP’s resident Science Grrl, Veronica Arreola, is here with a fantastic column adding to her WMC commentary on Larry Summers. Reminding us all that a much-celebrated election victory doesn’t mean our work is over, Veronica asks whether Summers is really change we can believe in. –Kristen

There’s much more not to like about Larry Summers than just one line in one speech.

First that line…It was not just a simple line, but a complex argument that was summarized into one line and then reinforced during the question and answer session and in subsequent interviews. And that was not all he said; he also ranked in order of importance three reasons why women are not well represented in science and engineering. First, he noted women’s unwillingness to work 80 hour weeks, second, their innate handicap in math, and finally, discrimination.

The first reason is important, because I believe it will soon become obsolete—it will be the straw that breaks academia’s back…MEN will quickly move into this category too. I have seen signs of Gen X men scoffing at 80 hour weeks because they want to be more than just the breadwinner. They want to know their children and enjoy their lives. Once a critical mass of men do, we’ll have more support for work/life balance. But what is flabbergasting is that Summer ranked discrimination last, privileging the idea that women are innately unable to do math as reason for our lack of representation. But the data simply does not bear out this theory.

While women hold the largest edge in biological sciences, they lose that edge by graduate school and quickly fade by faculty time. Obviously the on average 60% of biological sciences degree holders have a firm grasp on math, so what happens to them? Do they lose their math skills as they age? Doubtful. The genetic difference argument holds no water, and other factors, such as family pressures and lack of role models, give more valid insight into why women are being “lost in the pipeline” in graduate school.

Second issue: is Summers such a strong believer in the theory of the free market that he wouldn’t initiate any pro-women policies for fear of hindering the free market? That’s a question I’d like to see a Senator ask if Summers is nominated. Does welfare to single moms throw off the free market? Does it do more damage than a government bailout of the banking system? While Summers has written Financial Times columns in the past few months that show a greater role for a government hand in the economy, is this an actual rebirth, or would he still fall back on the free market policies of the Clinton years?

And lastly, yes, his past stance on the developing world is important to this debate. As I wrote in my WMC article about Summers, I voted for change and that means a change from this country using developing countries as a dumping ground.

My opposition to Larry Summers as Treasury Secretary goes beyond one line in one speech. It is the mentality and thoughts behind that one line, behind that one speech. What type of person thinks it is ok to say that women and girls can’t do math, and that he would be safe from rebuke for it? Will a man who holds these views fight for equal pay, give benefits for child care, or demand that discrimination be stamped out of the workplace?

The question: Does he or does he not believe in regulation … and if yes for financial markets, why NOT for labor markets?

~Thanks to economist Susan F. Feiner for guidance on this issue and for the last line.

–Veronica Arreola

Courtesy of our gal Rebekah at WMC again:

Potential Treasury Secretary Sheila Bair Is A “Woman To Watch” 11/10/08
Jezebel.com: Despite being the lone government employee on the list, Bair tops it not just because of her work in finance as the chair of the FDIC but because, more importantly, her name is bandied about as a black horse candidate for Treasury Secretary in an Obama Administration.

Women Seek Voice In Cabinet As Obama Team Short On Female Faces 11/10/08
Globe and Mail (Canada): The dominance of men on Obama’s transition economic advisory board begs the question: are women being overlooked?

Latinos And The Obama Cabinet 11/12/08
Washington Post: Latino political advocates, citing the importance of Latino votes in President-elect Barack Obama’s victory, are pressing him to appoint at least two and as many as four Latinos to his administration’s 20 Cabinet-level positions.

A quick tidbit to share from a recent dialogue on women’s leadership between Naomi Wolf and emotional intelligence guru Daniel Goleman, entitled “The Inner Compass for Ethics and Excellence.”

Naomi, among many other things of course, is co-founder of the Woodhull Institute for Ethical Leadership, where I’m a Fellow. During the dialogue, Naomi says something in reference to some of the young women who pass through Woodhull that may be tres a propos for GWP readers:

“Something we see a lot, is that young women come in, especially if they are highly educated, with a false voice – a false demeanor as a leader. You were talking about the visionary who speaks from the heart to the heart, but you can’t get there if you are presenting or accessing a persona that is artificial. People feel it and they are not moved. And you don’t produce as well as you could if you are putting all this energy into presenting a false front. It can be young women who have spent time in the academy, who tend to talk in an academic, stiff, jargoned way; women in the nonprofit world who tend to use abstractions; women from a male-dominated workplace, or who are surrounded by scientists in a male-dominated atmosphere, who feel like they have to repress the range of knowledge and interaction they have as women in order to be taken seriously. What’s really beautiful, is that when you bring out your highest ideals and aspirations and talents, and you send it out in the world, that’s when you are most effective. You see this amazing transformation.”

I’m thinking young men who come out of the academy and wonkland tend to speak stiffly too. But not, IMHO, Obama! Then again, he’s been said to have a “feminine” style of leadership–whatever that is.

Also from Naomi this fall is a new book: Give Me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries. And to that I say hells yeah–we sure could use more revolutionaries of late!

(Thanks to Matt for the heads up.)