WOMEN – Page 9 – Don't Gel Too Soon

G-L-O-R-I-A! Happy Birthday Gloria Steinem

I have known Gloria Steinem for a very long time. March 25th was her birthday and she is an amazing seventy-five years old! I've admired her since my teens. There used to be a magazine called SHOW, kind of a cross between Vanity Fair and New York Magazine. In 1963, when I was a senior in high school, Gloria published a piece there called "I Was a Playboy Bunny." Describing her three weeks as an "undercover" Bunny, the piece launched her career. I remember saying something half derogatory about it — remember I was 17 — and my mother saying to me "You're just jealous." She was right. What a great job, what an elegant woman, offers from magazines, everything I was determined to have for myself – she'd done it. If she could get out of Toledo, I could get out of Pittsburgh. (I did.)

I've had my eye on her ever since and as she helped to lead all of us out of the wilderness I felt a special ownership since we both attended Smith College. In those years, as I became more involved in what would be called the Second Wave of Feminism, Gloria was a spearhead for most of it. In fact, I once told a colleague of hers, a well-respected writer herself, how much I admired her. Her response "The way you feel about me? That's how I feel about Gloria."

On the tenth anniversary of Ms. Magazine, which Gloria had helped to found, I produced a series for The Today Show . For one segment, a camera crew and I followed her on a day-long trip to Philadelphia to make a speech. That was when I realized that her role was larger, and more personal, than I had understood.

Here's what happened: We got on the Metroliner in Penn Station and a woman came up to us to tell Gloria how she had changed her life. We arrived in Philadelphia and, right in the station, another women did the same. So it was all through the day. At the evening event, she could barely make her way through the room as an endless stream of women approached to thank her, express admiration, just talk to her. Through all of it, woman after woman after woman, she was unfailingly courteous and engaged. Each was the only one she was talking to. None was made to feel out of place or inappropriate. I don't know about you, but that's tough for a public person to do; Gloria has done it for years. In other words, she wasn't leading Feminism, she was being Feminism.

It's been like that ever since. In the public eye or out, hugely famous or less famous, she's always been there to keep the focus where it belongs and carry us further toward equality, and it's always been about all of us, not her. It's been an honor to know her, even a little bit, and to see personally that she's not just a fine leader, she's a fine person. Happy Birthday Gloria (a little bit late). We're lucky to have you.

Attachment Parents, Anxious Parents, Sanctimommies and Skinned Knees

This morning I helped to produce a conference on parenting and "over" parenting. It was designed to help anxious young parents who are often under pressure to be "better" and more attentive than their peers. They feed on each other and worry all the time, and in cases beyond my community (I don't see it here) they compete, sometimes with cruelty, to see who's the best.

If you're a "mommy blog" reader you'll see it all the time. One of my favorites is Liz Gumbinner, proprietor of Mom-101. She has a gentle, loving, yet often hilarious and almost always moving take on life as a parent. She also has a keen-eyed abhorrance for what she calls " Sanctimommies." She writes about them often, and their thoughtless comments and judgments. No matter how much we detest what they do, which is more often judgmental than well-meaning, they can get to us. They plant scary, painful doubts, especially when we are vulnerable.

I remember this torment so well. You don't want your child to feel bad. You don't want her to fall off the monkey bars. You certainly don't want him to be sad because he lost a T-Ball game and didn't get a medal or got a lower grade than the kid who sits next to him and didn't get a sticker on his paper. It's terrible. I think what's worse though is over-compensating to preserve delicate feelings.

And that's what much of this conference was aimed at. Speakers told parents that kids needed some autonomy, needed their own territory. That protecting them prevented them from learning how to solve problems and bounce back from the adversity that is part of life. They also made an interesting point that I think is controversial but tough to contradict. YES, moms and dads are both important, but dads have a different role. And mothers too often, in their frequent role as gatekeepers between the kids and daddy, set standards that are too squishy, not allowing the dads to find their own way to deal with their children.

This does not mean there is no overlap – nurturing dad and outward-facing mom. But both perspectives – female and male, have value. Many times as our kids grew up, my husband and I stopped one another from going too far in one way or the other. I wanted to send money to bail them out of a jam. My husband would remind me that if we ran to the rescue we were telling them that we didn't think they could take care of themselves. "If they really need help", he'd say, "they'll ask for it."

Other times he'd go nuclear in the punishment department or refuse permission for something perfectly acceptable because he didn't think first. That was my cue to step in and moderate things. I often thought sadly of friends raising kids alone, without this valuable balance.

I guess this is just a meditation on parenting in the 21st Century. It's painful to see wonderful parents whose instincts are sound and who love their kids get tangled up in these issues, and it was wonderful to watch the dialog today and the passions in the conversations that continued over lunch and will go forward in several after-sessions. In fact, it was very Web 2.0. The speakers may have set things off, but now they're working with one another, strengthening not only their families but also the community around them.

Women’s Health Care Takes the Stage on the Hill

It makes sense. On the heels of the announcement of a new committee (H/T Writes LIke She Talks and Punditmom) to oversee protection of women's rights, the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on International Operations and
Organizations, Human Rights, Democracy, and Global Women's Issues, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) have introduced the “Health Care for Women Resolution.” The resolution outlines a "new framework
for women’s health" and ensure that women’s needs are a key part of the
national health reform debate. At a newsconference today, where they announced the resolution, members of the Columbia
University Mailman School of Public Health released a report that makes it clear why such a resolution is necessary.

The report, “Women’s Health and Health Care Reform: The Key Role of
Comprehensive Reproductive Care,” explores the importance or reproductive health in women’s overall health
and urges that the promotion of reproductive
health be part of any national health plan. Thirty-eight of fifty deans of
schools of public health have endorsed the recommendations in
the report.

At a news conference announcing the resolutions, Rep. Schakowsky said:

"Any debate on national healthcare reform must address the healthcare
needs of women who are often the primary caregivers and decision makers
for their families," said Representative Schakowsky. "We know that
women face exceptional challenges and have a very personal stake in
fixing our broken health care system — they know we need to act now.
The current economic crisis is not an excuse for delay; it is a
persuasive argument for an immediate response.

With new leadership on the Hill and in the White House, let's hope these are the first of many positive developments.

Bloggers Support Kim Gandy for Women’s Bureau Leadership,

Despite the unpleasant posturing of the New Agenda, leading feminist bloggers are lifting their voices (or keyboards) in support of Kim Gandy, currently President of NOW, as the best and most effective candidate for leadership of the Labor Department's Women's Bureau. Among those speaking up are Liza Sabater of Culture Kitchen, Veronica Arreola at Viva La Feminista, PunditMom's Joanne Bamberger, Jill Miller Zimon at Writes Like She Talks, and me. We need more!

Kim Gandy Would Be a Perfect Director of the Women’s Bureau

This is Kim Gandy, currently moving toward the end of her second term as President of the National Organization for Women – known to most as NOW. Throughout her tenure she has been a fierce, sensitive and sensible advocate for women's rights and the rights of women as workers, whether at WalMart or West Point. (see her bio here or at the bottom of this post*) The initiatives she's launched have raised visibility and prospects for issues ranging from equal rights to violence against women, and she's been a national political force for women and girls. As a modern leader and early adopter of the Web, she has been a frequent speaker at online conferences including BlogHer, and Fem 2.0 among others. She is also, warm, smart, funny and determined.

Now she is a prime candidate to become Director of the Women's Bureau in the Department of Labor, a job she was born, and trained, to do, and there is a vague but nasty smear campaign emerging from a new organization that has very little track record and claims what appears to be a non-partisanship. I don't want to give them any more traffic by linking to them. But believe me, Kim Gandy, (full disclosure: I have worked a bit with her on a broad women's initiative) is a spectacular leader, committed to the equality and well-being of all women. If she is chosen, she will use her vast experience – and her vast network – to serve the women of this country with determination and political savvy.

We need and deserve her as our advocate in the Women's Bureau, and any who question her commitment or capacity are, in my view, sadly mistaken. Please ignore any groups detracting from her and her dedication to the safety, equality and success of American women and
those around the world. And if you're so inclined, you might want to post about it yourself!

*Kim Gandy – President

Kim
Gandy is serving her second term as president of the National
Organization for Women, elected by the group's grassroots members in
2001 and again in 2005. She has served as a national officer of NOW
since 1987 and in state, local and regional leadership positions since
1973.

Gandy also is president of the NOW Foundation, chair of NOW's Political Action Committees, and serves as the principal spokesperson for all three entities. Gandy oversees NOW's multi-issue agenda,
which includes: advancing reproductive freedom, promoting diversity and
ending racism, stopping violence against women, winning LGBT rights,
ensuring economic justice, ending sex discrimination and achieving
equality for women.

Since 2001, Gandy has led NOW's campaigns on issues ranging from
Supreme Court nominations to the rights of mothers and caregivers, from
Social Security reform to ending the war in Iraq. Through grassroots
political action, Gandy helped increase the women's vote and change the
face of Congress in 2006 and is leading the organization's efforts
around the pivotal 2008 elections.

Gandy regularly appears in print, television, radio and Internet
media, and she appreciates the enormous impact the media have on
women's lives. Under her direction, NOW has continued a decades-long
commitment to media issues, such as expanding women's opportunities in
the broadcast industry, increasing news coverage of women's issues, and
improving the portrayal of women and girls in advertising and all media.

During Gandy's presidency, NOW celebrated its 40 year anniversary,
organized conferences on issues affecting women of color and women with
disabilities, campaigned against Wal-Mart as a Merchant of Shame, and
expanded efforts to win equal marriage rights and benefits for same-sex
couples. Through the creation of NOW's Campus Action Network
and the Young Feminist Task Force, Gandy has demonstrated a commitment
to reaching out to young women and encouraging their leadership in the
organization.

During her first presidential term, Gandy was one of the lead organizers of The March for Women's Lives
in 2004. Gandy was a key organizer of the 1989 and 1992 marches, and
her expertise in mass actions helped ensure that 1.2 million activists
made the 2004 march for women's reproductive freedom the largest and
most diverse grassroots mobilization in our nation's history.

In the legislative arena, Gandy served on the drafting committees for two groundbreaking federal laws: the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which gave women the right to a jury trial and monetary damages in cases of sex discrimination and sexual harassment, and the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act,
which has dramatically decreased the daily violence at abortion
clinics. In addition, Gandy led the fight against anti-abortion
terrorists through the landmark racketeering case NOW v. Scheidler, which was in litigation for two decades and reached the Supreme Court three times.

In 1991 Gandy directed the WomenElect 2000 Project, a nine-month
grassroots organizing and recruiting effort in Louisiana which tripled
the number of women in the legislature, elected the state's first woman
Lieutenant Governor, and helped to defeat former Klansman David Duke
for Governor.

A long-time activist, Gandy served three years as Louisiana NOW
President. She was elected to the NOW National Board in 1982 and held
the position of Mid-South Regional Director for four years before being
elected to national office.

Gandy graduated from Louisiana Tech University in 1973 with a B.S.
in mathematics. Her NOW involvement inspired her to attend law school,
and she received her law degree in 1978 from Loyola University School
of Law, where she was a member of the Loyola Law Review and the
National Moot Court Team. Gandy went on to serve as a Senior Assistant
District Attorney in New Orleans, and later opened a private trial
practice, litigating countless cases seeking fair treatment for women.

Currently, she resides in Silver Spring, Md., with her husband Dr.
Christopher "Kip" Lornell, an ethnomusicologist and part-time Professor
of Music at George Washington University. They have two daughters,
Elizabeth Cady Lornell and Katherine Eleanor Gandy.

Fem 2.0 Where Are We Going? Notes from a Conference (A Special Tuesday Tour)

It's the morning after the remarkable event that was Fem 2.0, and I want to think a bit about what yesterday meant. Fem 2.0 is a new entity whose leaders organized a conference on the future of feminism and women's issues. Sounds like old stuff, but it's not. Because of their vision and connections, the organizers, especially Shireen Mitchell, Heather Holdridge, Liza Sabater and Gloria Pan were able to attract women who think about these issues but don't always attend the usual central-casting women's gatherings. Combined with them: several of the "rock stars" of 2nd and 3rd Wave feminism – from Gen Y to Boomers, as well as stars in the blogger universe.

For the first time I saw, at the same meeting, women my age and older, Gen X and younger, institutional and independent, white, black, brown and Asian – all terribly accomplished, articulate and thoughtful. The goal was to work toward the elimination of barriers among these varied groups to allow more focus on the issues that unite us. I know that sounds like Barack Obama and maybe his style increased the reception for this call to meeting, but it was really quite remarkable.

Gathered were institutional "rock stars" like Eleanor Smeal, President of Feminist Majority Foundation and publisher of Ms. Magazine, Kim Gandy, President of NOW, and Karen Mulhauser, former head of NARAL – all fierce veterans for women's rights, Rene Redwood of Redwood Enterprises and Ann Stone, introduced to the assembled as VP of the National Women's History Museum, which she is. She is also the courageous founder and long-time leader of Republicans for Choice – a group that, for many years, was enormously unpopular in Republican circles. It wasn't easy.

Alongside them as stars, but emerging more from the world of 2.0: Elisa Camahort Page of BlogHer, Kristen Rowe-Finkbeiner of Moms Rising, Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon and RH Reality Check, and Tedra Osell of Bitch PhD, among others. For the first time that I know of, the cohorts that these women represent were in the same rooms, talking to each other not only about feminism, but also about the factors (age, geek level, parent status etc) that divide them.

Many people have posted detailed descriptions of parts of the day. Here are a few: Jen Nedeau at Chang.org offers a nice summary. Laurie White live-blogged several sessions including the one at which I spoke. Momcrats (no surprise) were out in force and report here. Friend, house guest and major league blogger Jill Miller Zimon sums up the plenaries and some other events.

I'm sure there will be more; if there are enough I'll do a follow-up. The day was very important to most of us and if I haven't convinced you, read some of the accounts. Sometimes barriers among allies are tougher to overcome than those among adversaries. Fem 2.0 gave us a real start. They deserve our thanks. And have them, from over here where I sit.

Fem 2.0 Panel Video – At A Crossroads: Organizing the Next Generation of Feminists Online and Off

Thanks to the amazing Nerdette, who managed to participate brilliantly and shoot the panel at the same time, you can watch at least a portion of our Fem 2.0 panel. TanyaTarr, Jen Nedeau
and I were honored by a smart, challenging and provocative audience and
learned at least as much as we talked. As Tanya put it, "I just gained
300 more sisters. There's no other way to say it."

I also promised an updated set of links if many more posts appeared. Here are a few:

Loryn C. Wilson's take on Womanism and the conference
Nerdette's post on Not My Gal, including this video, which she shot and edited
Our third panelist (and expert moderator), Jen Nedau's review
Veronica I. Arreola at Viva La Feminista describes her very interesting plenary appearance with Eleanor Smeal, Kim Gandy, Elisa Camahort Page and others.
Laurie White at Laurie Writes continues her phenomenal series of live session posts
more measured response from
Jill Miller Zimon at Writes Like She Talks has a second post with links to more than a dozen reviews of the Linkfluence presentation
On TechPresident, Sairy Granger offers a different take on the Linkfluence map of feminist bloggers, presented at the conference.
There are also posts by Emily Kronenberger at New Wave Grrrl, FlashFree, DJ Nelson at All Diva Media and, I'm sure, many more to come.

As you can see, it was an experience everyone wanted to share.

Tuesday Tour #2

This Tuesday Tour is actually doing some random wandering. You know, we do it so you don't have to. First of all, Women's Rights at Change.org features two great posts in a row: One on equal pay laws and the risk they may pose. It's very provocative, and crammed with both information and exciting ideas. The second is an intriguing meditation on the emergence (or not) of the Fourth Wave of feminism. They'll keep you busy thinking long after you've read them.

In case you missed this one, the inimitable Leslie Bradshaw describes a whole new way to look at online advertising. Whether you have online real estate or not, this concept of "nanotargeting" is intriguing, and a little unsettling. For comfort, go see the most amazing pair of shoes ever. Really.

Educators take note: Jason Fall's Social Media Explorer not only offers a list of the top election blogs but also, in a great lesson in Internet research, explains how he found them. The always-wise Charlene Li has altered her year-end predictions; which deals, appropriately this close to the Inauguration, with "the Obama-maniacs." BlogHer's Erin Kotecki Vest previews BlogHer Inauguration coverage plans. And we end with another inauguration story – but it's more fun if you don't know what it is until you get there. See you tomorrow.

Mommy Wisdom Across the InterWeb

This week I took dinner over to a couple who just became parents of an infant son. It had been a long time coming and it was very moving to sit in their living room and sense the peace and – to be honest – blessedness of their parenthood. I started out "doing something nice" by taking dinner and of course got far more out of it myself. Being in that room is a memory I will cherish.

I told them about all the parenting tips offered in virtual baby showers I'd been part of, and about all the other posts I'd done about my children and my life as a mother. Then I kind of promised I'd send them the links. I figured, though, that as long as I was pulling it all together I'd make a little package for anyone else looking for the kind of parenting advice that A) might be really good and B) you can ignore without hurting anyone's feelings. So here they are — and as The Band wrote, "take what you need and leave the rest."

First of all, since you have a son, here's a Julie's gift: a blog list filled with wisdom — a virtual baby shower of advice and warnings about raising boys. There's a list of "boy songs" too. That's a bonus. If you want to read my contribution, it's here.

And what about just plain good advice about being a mom? That was the first shower, and it's full of funny and often very moving posts. Here's mine.

This one's kind of funny, and will look like it's a million years away – but it's fun: what to do when a second kid shows up and makes everything crazy all over again. I wrote for that one, too.

My favorite is the one whose subject was "memories of the first thirty days." It was an emotional whopper; once I started I had trouble stopping. Here's what I remember.

Finally, as you enter this amazing new life, a preview of what it's like when your kids are grown and gone. They're from December of 2006 and this past Thanksgiving. For some reason both struck a nerve with readers; it's an amazing adventure you've embarked upon – and it's glorious in all its phases. I wish you half the joy I've known.

Oh Sarah! (Palin) But Could She Be (A Little Bit) Right?

Just when we thought it was safe to go back in the water…. there she is again! This time, though, some of what she says is creepily unsettling. This loads slowly but is worth the wait – we can talk about it after you watch it.

Here’s the thing: Do you really think people, especially journalists, would have been so cruel to an “unwed mother” whose parents were progressive politicians? Or to a Rockefeller or even a Bush? Throughout the interview, Palin raises the issue of class, and of the attacks on her kids; we’ll touch on that in a minute.

During the campaign, I wrote about Palin and the class issue, and the sad parallels to Paula Jones. The fact is that Sarah Palin isn’t sophisticated, that she’ be a popular Girl Scout leader or Women’s Club president in the life that existed when I was a kid – around the Mad Men era. Maybe that would have been OK if she’d known more, or been less cruel and incendiary in her speeches. Her inherent lack of sophistication and experience, what William Galston has called “a celebration of ignorance” enabled much of the class snobbery the followed. But follow it did; not in the “she’s not our kind” sort of way – it was far more subtle than that. More in the collective realization of the “cool people” that she was a WalMart, polyester lady thrust into a J Crew sort of world.

Now. Let’s think about the kids. The family itself was kind of a throwback I guess. And their omnipresence – thrust onto the stage – was weird. But when Elizabeth Edwards was criticized for taking the kids on the road during the campaign, feminists and others leapt to her defense. When Al Gore Jr. was arrested in a DUI it was a “private family matter,” not a continuing object of ridicule. Somehow though, the way this pregnancy and relationship has been portrayed has been cruel and tawdry without casting much light on Palin, her tenure or her philosophy.* And remember the whole “mommy wars” thing – did Palin put her career ahead of her kids? One person who wrote consistently well about this is PunditMom. Take a look.

None of what I’m saying here justifies what Palin stood for or did as a candidate. She was, and is, a scary person hiding behind “adorableness.” But we need to think about the mainstream coverage of her campaign and how much of it derided matters of class and family, not policy and ideology. There was certainly enough of that substantial stuff to keep any reporter busy.

What do you think?

*I am not talking about conversations concerning issues of choice, sex education or contraception but of the less substantial, more visible harumphing.