|
.jpg)
Recent Similar Articlesgender:
|
Temporary Gender Discrimination
by
Sudhama Ranganathan | 10.11.2009
Besides being illegal and uncool gender discrimination is something to be eliminated from any civilized society concerned with moving itself forward. Like racism sexism, unfortunately is still alive and kicking. For a long time it was something people tended to overlook, excuse and deny. If women were on TV in powerful roles they must have achieved equality. If we didn't hear about it discrimination didn't exist.  The fact is it does and recently oozed from the bowels of antiquity kicking dust off ugly and nasty sentiments from the past. It seems certain politicians believe when they decide it's convenient using sexist sentiment is okay to whip up support. It also reveals deeper beliefs about women and their "place" in society coming from a certain side of the political spectrum. That women should be subservient to men despite the law is what it says. It excuses attitudes towards women not tolerated towards men. Recently some very visible examples have played out publicly. Debate regarding the War in Afghanistan heated up again recently. Underscoring this is the controversy surrounding comments made by General Stanley McChrystal claiming a lack of direct access to President Obama since taking command in Afghanistan. Emphasizing the importance of utilizing chain of command specifically in military matters, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said, "in this process, it is imperative that all of us taking part in these deliberations — civilians and military alike — provide our best advice to the President candidly but privately." Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi reinforced this belief by saying messages ,“to the president should go up the line of command. They shouldn’t be in press conferences.” In response to Speaker Pelosi Ken Spain released a statement on behalf of the National Republican Congressional Committee that, "if Nancy Pelosi's failed economic policies are any indicator of the effect she may have on Afghanistan, taxpayers can only hope that McChrystal is able to put her in her place." For a group dominated by men to say the first woman speaker of the house needs to know her place is beyond insensitive. It displays a lack of respect for the incredible step forward that position symbolizes to so many around the nation both men and women and says certain Republicans don't feel proud of that accomplishment. The Republican party couldn't have issued a more knuckle dragging statement on its own behalf. This from the party of Rush Limbaugh who said, regarding a woman's club Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor belonged to, "I think I'm going to send Sotomayor, and her club, a bunch of vacuum cleaners to help them clean up after their meetings." (http://www.now.org/issues/media/hall-of-shame/) This among the deep trove of demeaning gems. The insult came from the same party that hailed the beginnings of women's rights in Afghanistan as something to be lauded and rightly so. But, when this dull headed public trespass was broadcast over cable and network newscasts alike not a peep from the party regarding an apology or public denouncement was made. In fact the comments have been supported. When Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz pointed out the mostly male make up of the NRCC the response was that the Representative was, "attacking white males." Secretary Gates never received any put down even though as Wasserman Schultz pointed out in an interview with MSNBC's Contessa Brewer, "if they have a problem with the speakers place they really are going to have to take that up with the founding fathers, because Article 1 Section 8 (of the Constitution) gives only Congress the power to declare war and Article 1 Section 9 gives only Congress the power of the purse."(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fo5G0bqVz4) Not only does she have this right as an elected official to make the comment, but as the Speaker of the House she is in exactly the place she should be in considering the issue. Ken Spain then insulted the speaker and women everywhere by further saying, "Nancy Pelosi is playing out of her league." As if in addition a woman does not have the intelligence equaling male counterparts. Speaker Pelosi's response was to the point, "it's really sad; they just don't know how inappropriate that is..., I'm in my place. I'm the speaker of the House, the first woman speaker of the House, and I'm in my place because the House of Representatives voted me here... that language is something I haven't even heard in decades."(http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/08/speaker-pelosi-im-in-my-place/) Further ventures in the direction of openly displaying gender bias in one's politics was the recent vote on an amendment to a Defense Appropriations bill aimed at punishing contractors who "restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court."(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/07/meet-the-senators-who-vot_n_312976.html) The problem one might have against this legislation is unclear as this would give further protection to women and protect their rights. However, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions voiced his opposition to such protections claiming it was a "political attack directed at Halliburton." This is a reference to the case against a Halliburton subsidiary KBR. Think progress reported on September 16, "in 2005, Jamie Leigh Jones was gang-raped by her co-workers while she was working for Halliburton/KBR in Baghdad. In an apparent attempt to cover up the incident, the company then put her in a shipping container for at least 24 hours without food, water, or a bed, and 'warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she’d be out of a job.' Even more insultingly, the DOJ resisted bringing any criminal charges in the matter. KBR argued that Jones’ employment contract warranted her claims being heard in private arbitration — without jury, judge, public record, or transcript of the proceedings." The legislation was not specifically against KBR it was protection for all women everywhere reporting such cases. It passed, but all thirty members of the Senate who voted against the amendment were Republican. The message sent - women's rights is favorable only when it's politically convenient and on another continent. If the GOP is seriously interested in changing their image taking the rights of over fifty percent of the US population seriously could be a step in the right direction. Behaving like women's rights are some painful American legacy we must endure is not a step in the right direction. The future of America is multi faceted. That's not a current trend that could go the other way any day now with a little encouragement. It's simply the way things are a fact of life - like change. To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com. |
|
© 1999–2008 Philadelphia Independent Media Center |
|
Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by PhillyIMC.
|
Comments
Post new comment