The Midlife Feminist

52: The Year of the Flying Leap

2010-08-31T21:01:00.000-07:00

Today, I celebrate another trip around the sun.

I've been doing this for more than a half-century now, so I feel like I've got a handle on birthdays. Every September 1, I try to take stock of the previous year and pick out a theme for the year to come.

This time, it's a no-brainer. I'm calling 52 "The Year of the Flying Leap." Because I just took a big one.

I've got a little experience with this. Six years ago, I left a 20-year career in journalism and took an entry-level position in marketing. Five years before that, I moved 700 miles to take a job I wasn't exactly sure I had.

And here I am, taking another flying leap away from a steady, secure, full-time job. Where I'm going sounds cool and cutting edge, the place I have always believed journalism should go. But there are no guarantees.

None at all.

Twelve years ago, I learned guarantees are really just figments of our imagination. My father worked every day of his life and just when he should have been enjoying a comfortable retirement, he was diagnosed with cancer. Two years later, he was gone.

I had always heard nothing on earth is promised to us. I just didn't believe it until then.

Thirteen months after Dad passed, I took the biggest flying leap of my life - and found a community that now feels like home, not to mention the last, best love of my life.

Five years later, I took another big, flying leap away from everything I knew how to do and into an enriching, creative adventure.

Now here I stand again, on the edge of a cliff.

And I can't wait to see what comes next.

Full circle

2010-08-19T19:09:00.000-07:00

Today, I emerged from the haze of summer school, clutching a bundle of new thoughts about feminism and gender, and my stack of now-useless textbooks, and what did I find?

A world gone mad.

While I read chapter after chapter of feminist theory, a group of conservative women in politics began calling themselves Mama Grizzlies and announced their plan to take back America.

While I underlined and highlighted significant passages on gender schemas, two women were sworn in as Supreme Court justices, but only after having their sexuality questioned.

While I plowed through multiple choice quiz questions, The Atlantic's Hanna Rosin pondered "The End of Men".

And as I took my final, two women writing for Forbes.com suggested maybe marrying for money is the smart thing to do. I'm glad they did, it's a nice way to wrap up the summer.

Let's start there, with the horrifyingly cynical argument that it makes more sense to marry for money. Elizabeth Ford and Daniela Drake, M.D. consider themselves "smart girls." After watching so many smart, professional women still working long hours, while dumber girls reveled in the lifestyle that comes with marrying into wealth, they decided those dumb girls must be on to something:

We asked ourselves: "Why are these women faring better than the smart chicks?"

Since we think of ourselves as smart girls, here's the bottom line: Find your fortune while you're young and marry a man with money.

This is what we call the Gold-Digging Imperative--"The GDI."

To be honest, that part doesn't bother me. Gold-digging is nothing new, and it's a behavior generally tied to some harsh public criticism. I don't see any need to pile on. No, what bothers me is the idea that gold-digging is something smart women should choose. That putting one's fate entirely in the hands of the man you marry is actually preferable to hard work and personal accomplishment.

We've come full circle now, haven't we? Fifty years ago, women fought tooth and nail to have careers of their own and a sense of financial independence. Now we have these women telling us that a lifetime of hard work is over-rated, that enjoying wealth earned by someone else is the smarter way to go.

I would let this go, but I see Ford and Drake's advice as further evidence of a disturbing trend. Their voices emerge at the same time women hold more than half of all American jobs, but only a tiny fraction of the jobs at the top of the corporate ladder.

They're speaking out only weeks after a white man destroyed the reputation of a black woman by falsifying a videotape, and she was the one who lost her job. They're speaking out at the same time political celebrities Sarah Palin and Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann are spreading the gospel of moral conservatism, with an emphasis on virtuous motherhood and heterosexual marriage.

Some of you may think I'm making too far a leap, but I see more and more women who don't like the way things are, and who seem to want to go back to the way things were.

Or do you think it's just that 4.0 in my Women & Gender Studies classes talking?

Let Wonder Woman be Wonder Woman

2010-07-02T05:07:00.000-07:00

The new costume is "a look designed to be taken seriously as a warrior, in partial answer to the many female fans over the years who've asked, 'how does she fight in that thing without all her parts falling out?,'" Straczynski said in his online posting. -- CBC News

In my youth, I loved Wonder Woman. Well, Wonder Woman as portrayed by Lynda Carter. The DC comic books were by brother's territory.

But on the small screen, Carter's extraordinarily fit physique gave that cheesy red, white and blue costume some credibility. She carried herself tall and proud, standing toe to toe with those crazy Nazis who were out to destroy the world. After the series tanked in 1975, I lost track of Wonder Woman. I didn't keep up with her comic book adventures and the evolution of the character.

So when I started reading all the buzz about Wonder Woman's new look, I got curious. Mostly, I wondered why everyone was so concerned about her clothing, and the message it sends. The new duds - basically a form-fitting blue jacket and pants - have been described as "dowdy," "new and not improved," and "Goth Day at the Sherman Oaks Galleria." DC Comics has ruined Wonder Woman, stolen her feminist identity and all her pizazz. She's ruined, they say. Ruined.

Well, here's what I say: Sisters, seriously - snap a grip.

Over 600 issues of her DC comic, Wonder Woman has developed an epic back story (detailed on ComicVine.com in depths I have yet to fully plumb). Her costume has changed, the mantle of her character was even taken over once by an entirely different Amazon. But Wonder Woman has never lost her feminist roots, because feminist roots are something you never lose. No matter what she wears, Wonder Woman will always be a pioneering feminist heroine, because she was created that way.

Artist William Moulton Marston based his ground-breaking character in part on his wife, Elizabeth Holloway Marston, who was nothing less than a pioneering feminist. She earned three college degrees and became an attorney in the early 1900s, a time when women just didn't do that. When she sought support from her father to attend law school, he refused, so she earned the $100 herself. Though she never received formal recognition, Elizabeth is historically credited with having played a critical role in her husband's development of the polygraph (remember Wonder Woman's magic Lasso of Truth?). She worked even after her two children came along and supported the children of Olive Byrne, another model for the comic book character, who lived with Elizabeth and William in a polyamorous relationship - yet another rejection of societal norms for women.

You don't erase a history like that with a costume. And look at the new Wonder Woman character. Award-winning writer J. Michael Straczynski has created a backstory in which the gods have changed an element of Amazon history, sending the Wonder Woman character an on entirely new trajectory. She was raised and is living on the run, an "Amazon refugee," whose island home has been destroyed by evil forces. Here's how ComicVine.com describes the core of her personal story:

She is much the same character she has always been, but she is coping (not well) with the realization that she has not well served her gods-given mission as an ambassador and teacher of peace but as an Amazon warrior.

It's a classic, epic struggle between the darkness and the light. It's a fresh, new look at a character whose story has spanned 600 installments. It's... a comic book, people.

Put her in a skimpy, star-spangled bathing suit or a fairly ordinary jacket and pants, Wonder Woman is still a pioneering character. But the emphasis is on the word "character." Over the years, her life and her look will change to keep the product fresh.

What will never change is the story of how she came to be, inspired by the life of a woman whose commitment to herself opened doors that never again remained fully closed.

Tell that story, sisters. And let Wonder Woman be Wonder Woman.

(This article was also used to source this column: Wikipedia - Wonder Woman)

Lighten up: Sex and the City : 2

2010-05-30T13:24:00.000-07:00

The reviews are in, and Sex and the City: 2 sucks.

I went anyway. And in defiance of common wisdom, really enjoyed myself.

This particular franchise isn't likely to toe any particular cultural line. We're talking about four fictional characters crafted to reflect a complete lack of propriety: Carrie - who had trouble with fidelity and an irresponsible obsession with shoes, Miranda - who got pregnant out of wedlock, came close to having an abortion and then dumped her boyfriend to marry the father of her child, Charlotte - and her inappropriate insistence on appropriate behavior, and Samantha - who simply redefines the word "inappropriate".

Here's what I expected: Over the top storyline, outrageous fashion, opulence and wealth, and a little sex and romance thrown in for good measure. That's what I got.

I coveted Miranda's camel-riding outfit.

I laughed at Samantha's rage against the menopause.

I empathized with Charlotte's heartbreak at not being the perfect mother.

I mulled over Carrie's struggle to be married, after years of single life.

Was I supposed to do anything else?

We all have guilty pleasures, things we enjoy that we believe we're not supposed to enjoy. Trashy novels, junk food, brain candy - none of it's meant to be taken seriously. I don't know about you, but I need that stuff right now. Like the ladies of Sex and the City: 2, I occasionally need to find a place where nothing matters but having fun. In fact, I think our souls shrivel if we don't lighten up at least once in a while.

That's what I went to do: lighten up. And I had a good time.

Except the part where I paid $12.50 for a bag of popcorn and a large Coke Zero. And why is it movie reviewers never say anything about that?

Defending beauty queens

2010-05-19T05:20:00.000-07:00

The most unlikely people are defending Miss USA Rima Fakih.

Feminists. Feminists are defending a beauty pageant winner.

The women of The View pooh-poohed provocative pole dancing photos revealed by Detroit radio jock Mojo the morning after the contest. Old-school feminist Joy Behar noted Fakih's attire was hardly shocking, and Sherri Shepherd pointed out photos of the contestants aired before the contest were far more revealing. The conversation focused on the reality of this competition, which - as Whoopi Goldberg said - is all about "how you look."

But the real surprise came on the Ms. Blog, where Fakih got well-deserved feminist props for her statement that birth control should be covered the way other medications are covered by insurance. Kate Whittle also decried the subtle - and not so subtle - racism and sexism that have followed behind the pageant.

More and more, I see a shift away from the monolithic feminist stereotype that provides a natural enemy for women like Sarah Palin. I see more conservative women unafraid to identify as feminists and more liberal women stretching the bounds of their feminist understanding.

In fact, somebody out there has formally wondered whether the Tea Party is, in fact, a feminist movement, because of the way its women candidates have emerged. We know women are under-represented in elected office, and we know the major political parties exercise extraordinary control over elections. Consider the plight of Connie Saltonstall, a pro-choice advocate who abandoned her Michigan 1st congressional candidacy after party leaders lined up behind an anti-choice man to replace... wait for it... an anti-choice man.

How "feminist" is that?

If the Tea Party catches hold as a viable alternative, its anti-mainstream focus could open doors for women. If they happen to be conservative Republican women, so what? This is still feminism 101.

Equal opportunity for women is a simple concept, with complex applications. We may not be accustomed to seeing feminists defend beauty queens, or seeing conservative Republicans promote women candidates, but it's happening.

And while the discussion about all this might start to get a little messy, I really like where it's headed.

Feminists don't let feminists target other women

2010-05-15T18:49:00.000-07:00

For quite some time, I have consciously resisted writing about Republican rock star Sarah Palin.

I see former Governor Palin as a celebrity riding the public gravy train for all its worth. And bless her heart for making money. I hope she's being taxed on it, I hope she's spending it. So many Americans can't do that right now, we need more six- and seven-figure incomes to pump up our economy.

But now, Ms. Palin has set her sights on keeping women who don't agree with her out of public office. And according to a recent essay by Kasie Hunt, published at Politico.com, she's done it while calling herself a feminist.

With so few women in office, this is not a time to devolve into the same muddy partisan mess that got us here. We need more women in Congress to change the conversation.

You don't have to be a Democrat or a Republican to do that. You just have to be someone is willing to listen and learn, to think in new directions, to reach across the aisle, to have the robust and honest conversations about how to best serve the American people, rather than power or political ideology.

Someone who rolls out a map of the United States with gun sights trained on certain states is probably not in that frame of mind.

Hunt noted that Palin says she feels connected to "gun-totin', pioneer feminism," but nothing about her hard-core conservative political activism resonates with feminist history. Early suffragists came together to better the lives of all women. As the movement progressed, prominent suffragist Elizabeth Cady Stanton promoted the idea that women should take up activism on other political issues.

Her sister-in-arms Susan B. Anthony disagreed, for a simple reason:

I have maintained my original attitude, believing that for the leaders of the work for woman suffrage to identify themselves with the other issues of the day is to create animosities and alienate supporters of a cause which can achieve victory only through the assistance of all religious bodies and political parties.("Woman's Half-Century of Evolution", North American Review 175 (Dec. 1902): 800-810. Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library.)

(If you read this blog regularly, you know that's my favorite SBA quote. Keep reading, you'll see it again.)

As 19th century women chose to unite behind the cause of suffrage, women today must work together to achieve equal representation in government and leadership across all sectors. In the spirit of Susan B. Anthony, I submit the feminist thing to do is to support all women running for office. I know it's a lofty goal in today's divisive political climate.

But at the very least, could we all refrain from drawing targets on the backs of women with whom we disagree?

(If you'd like to support an organization that works to support all women running for office, by teaching them the nuts and bolts of campaigning, take a moment to learn about (and contribute to) The White House Project.)

The real outrage

2010-04-30T06:14:00.000-07:00

A few days ago, human rights activists around the world began issuing statements in opposition to Iran's candidacy for a seat on the United Nation's Commission on the Status of Women.

I probably don't have to explain why people would be opposed to having Iran represented in a group whose stated mission is to "evaluate progress on gender equality, identify challenges, set global standards and formulate concrete policies to promote gender equality and advancement of women worldwide." Besides, that's already been done, in a letter signed not only by women's rights advocates, but more than 200 prominent Iranians.

And yet, in a press release issued April 28, the U.N. Economic and Social Council announced that Iran is now a new member of the Commission:

"Next, the Council elected 11 new members to fill an equal number of vacancies on the Commission on the Status of Women for four-year terms beginning at the first meeting of the Commission’s fifty-sixth session in 2011 and expiring at the close of its fifty-ninth session in 2015. The Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia and Zimbabwe were elected from the Group of African States; Iran and Thailand were elected from the Group of Asian States; Estonia and Georgia were elected from the Group of Eastern European States; Jamaica was elected from the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States; and Belgium, Netherlands and Spain were elected from the Group of Western European and Other States." (Read the full press release.)

There will be - in fact, there has already been - outrage expressed about Iran's election to a four-year term, and rightly so. Not as widely denounced, however, is the appointment of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where rape and violence against women is considered epidemic. Take a moment to read this article by Guardian reporter Judith Wanga, who describes horrors most of us cannot even imagine. "In eastern Congo, rape and sexual violence are routinely employed as weapons to subjugate villages and terrorise entire communities," she writes.

And the Congolese government does nothing - nothing - to stop this. Laws exist, they are simply ignored. Consider this report from the BBC:

More than 8,000 women were raped during fighting in 2009, the UN says.

"Women have no rights, if those who violate their rights go unpunished," Ms Wallstrom told the UN Security Council on her return from DR Congo.

"If women continue to suffer sexual violence, it is not because the law is inadequate to protect them, but because it is inadequately enforced," she said.

I couldn't find a complaint about the Democratic Republic of Congo serving on the CSW, even though it could be reasonably argued that country's treatment of women is at least as awful as Iran's. Perhaps those who rail about the U.N. elections have only complained about Iran because we are at war with Iran or because it scores some cheap and easy political points. But there is nothing cheap or easy about fighting the oppression of women and children world-wide.

Do not be distracted by this hue and cry and finger-pointing about the United Nations. While it goes on, women in the Congo will be raped and mutilated, women in Iran will be stoned to death and women around the world will live another day in fear and pain.

And women will continue to suffer these atrocities long after Iran's four-year term on the Commission is over, unless we do more than express outrage only when people we don't like do something outrageous.

When I am old, I shall ride a Harley

2010-04-24T13:27:00.000-07:00

Originally published August 2005

My mother and her sisters are closer than most siblings, I think because their parents died too soon. Mom was the youngest; the older three helped raise her.

The Strom sisters now range in age from 67 to almost 80, and they are a lively bunch when they get together. Very little complaining about aches and pains in this group. Too many stories to share. Too many grandchildren to hug and great-grandbabies to cuddle.

Jeanne, the oldest, has begun to write her life story. "My kids have been after me to do it," she said and then asked me to help edit her words. She wants to tell her children about the grandparents none of us knew and the world before they were born.

We gather now every year at the same pavilion in Starbuck, just a few feet from the sand and reed shores of Lake Minnewaska. Not everyone can make it every year; we are scattered around the country. Cousins are turning 40, 50 and 60, and our children are having children. We're all busy people. We have trouble staying in touch.

I look at my mother and her sisters, how close they are, how much a part of each other's lives they've been for...well, for as long as they've been. My generation has not followed suit, but we are getting older, more aware of time passing. We nudge our mothers about recording their memories, organizing photos, eating right, taking care of themselves.
The Strom sisters' husbands once formed an unusual fraternity, meeting on the front porch or around a game on TV while the ladies chatted non-stop in the kitchen. Uncle Vernon passed a few years ago, my own father has been gone 7 years and almost six months. Uncle Dale's rehabbing after a stroke, he doesn't speak much and tires easily. Uncle Wally still does leather work and small engine repair in the back of a tiny shoe store he and Aunt Jeanne have owned for as long as I can remember.

The Strom sisters - Jeanne, Colleen, Donna and Harriet - have had health problems and family challenges and heartbreaking losses and prayed hard through it all. When I think of them, I remember most the outrageously funny stories - like the time they drove to see an aging relative and ended up asking the same gas station attendant for directions twice, because everybody thought somebody else was paying attention.

As they pulled in the drive a third time, he walked out with a pen and paper in hand.

Add to this bulging treasure chest of memories these pictures of Donna and Jeanne on the back of my cousin Dell's restored classic Harley Davidson motorcycle, the roar of delight and the scramble for the cameras as they swung their legs over the seat and held on tight.

Colleen didn't dare risk the stress on her back.

"I golf and then I go the chiropractor, so I can golf some more," she said, laughing.

We asked my mother if she'd take a ride, she just shook her head. But she's young yet.

Truth be told

2010-04-24T13:25:00.000-07:00

Originally published February 2007

"What stuns me most about contemporary politics is not even that the system has been so badly corrupted by money. It is that so few people get the connection between their lives and what the bozos do in Washington and our state capitols." --Molly Ivins (1944-2007)

The thing is, so few people tell the truth any more.

I’m not saying people lie. It’s just that too few have the courage to speak plainly. And their numbers declined last week, when Molly Ivins died of breast cancer.

Long ago, I found great inspiration in a book titled, Molly Ivins Can’t Say That, Can She?. The woman said what she thought, what a lot of other people thought and didn’t have the guts to say out loud. She had pet names for politicians, the most infamous being "Shrub," as a moniker for George W. Bush.

And she used potent metaphors with wild abandon, often befuddling her employers. According to one former editor, her first column for the Fort Worth Star Telegram included a reference to sex toys. It made sense, Texas lawmakers had drawn an arbitrary line in the sand about possession of said sex toys, making it a felony to own six or more.

But who would use this kind of example for mass consumption, for a column read by millions of men, women and – one might assume – a few children?

Molly Ivins would. Molly Ivins did, over and over again. She died as she had lived, poking at all of us, reminding us that government is not a spectator sport:

“We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders.”

Even as she lost her own battle with breast cancer, Molly never stopped fighting against the war in Iraq, demanding that each of us take some action to stop the war, to let the troops know we support them and are trying to get them out of harm’s way. She wanted to inspire a good, old-fashioned “newspaper crusade” against the Shrub’s troop surge, which he proposed despite opposition by a decided majority of Americans, Congressional representatives and the Iraq Study Group recommendations:

“We need people in the streets, banging pots and demanding, ‘Stop it, now!’.”

She wrote about her opposition to the war in Iraq, long before it became popular to be opposed. Like this, on November 19, 2002: “The greatest risk for us in invading Iraq is probably not war itself, so much as: What happens after we win?”

She wasn’t afraid of being labeled a cut-and-runner, a disloyal American, a terrorist sympathizer, because she knew that just wasn't true.

Having the courage of her convictions, I believe, made it possible for her to speak her truth plainly and to be heard over the generous helpings of name-calling and shaming and nasty innuendo that passes for political debate these days.

Her voice, her strong and truthful voice, will be missed.

What I learned on Equal Pay Day

2010-04-20T19:49:00.000-07:00

When I agreed to set up a live webcast of the April 20 Equal Pay Day press conference, I figured I would pick up quite a bit of practical knowledge. And I did.

For instance, I learned the public Internet connection at the Capitol building in Lansing is a little... weak. I was told that might be a problem, because the Legislature was in session. It was, more than I expected. But people told me they were able to watch.

I learned that when it comes to technology, one back-up plan is probably not enough. I had a plan that included two back-up plans. And I could actually have used a third.

I learned that Michigan has the 43rd worst gender pay gap in the country. And I learned that's ... strange as it sounds... progress. We used to be 49th.

I learned that Ontario has Pay Equity legislation. ONTARIO.

I learned that legislation to create a Pay Equity Commission and make it illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of gender when they determine levels of pay has stalled in the Legislature - for more than 20 years. But you know, I wasn't at all depressed, because I was also reminded other important changes in law have taken far longer.

And here's what I got out of all those lessons: The easy thing to do is give up. I was about ready when I couldn't get the Web cam to come up on my Mac, and my back-up Internet connection wouldn't work because apparently I needed a license after a "free trial", but I just kept sweating through different approaches until - much to my surprise - something worked.

Michigan's pay equity legislation needs the same approach.

Generally speaking, I think most people oppose gender discrimination in wages and employment. But some don't want government to interfere with the free market's ability to accomplish pay equity. They're concerned that forcing businesses to raise certain wages will result in job losses, higher taxes and an unfair situation for men. They believe women create their own pay gap, by leaving work to have children or choosing professions that are typically lower-paid. (These and other arguments are presented and addressed in AFSCME: What are common arguments against pay equity - and how can the union respond?)

This is a tough issue, especially for Michigan. A state legislature facing a budget crisis every year seems unlikely to take up pay equity legislation. But our lawmakers should. Pay equity can strengthen families, by ensuring both parents are being fairly compensated. It can help single working mothers better care for their families, perhaps even move some of those families away from government programs and toward economic independence. In my experience, even modest increases in wages at the lowest levels can have a big impact.

Advocates for equal pay need to quantify those potential benefits for the State of Michigan, for workers, for families - maybe even for businesses. For years, people have talked about how the wage gap hurts women, and it does. But with two wage earners in so many families, it's hurting children and men as well.

One message about pay equity is not enough. We need a plan and a back up plan, and a back up plan for our back up plan, so we can keep making the case, for as long as it needs to be made. The people who oppose pay equity haven't given up. And neither should we.

In search of our better selves

2010-04-11T17:15:00.000-07:00

Imagine that you are at a loud, boisterous, formal party. All around you, people are gathered in clusters, having animated conversations. Suddenly, you realize someone next to you is saying something with which you vehemently disagree.

As your blood begins to boil, you:

a) calm down and find a group of people who agree with you. After all, it's a big room.
b) join the group, introduce yourself and respectfully engage the speaker.
c) push your way in and, without so much as a how d'you do, start poking a finger into the speaker's chest, calling names and using crude language.

My guess is most people would move on to a different conversation. Some brave souls might actively engage in debate with a complete stranger. Generally speaking, though, people in their right minds don't walk up to complete strangers and pick a fight.

But every day, thousands of people pour out a revolting stream of rude, crude, mean, vile, violent, insulting, homophobic, racist and misogynistic comments on newspaper Web sites, blogs and other social media sites. And they seem to think they have the inalienable right to do so, without consequence.

The difference between a party and the Internet, of course, is anonymity. Without the burdensome yoke of responsibility for their statements, some folks will, quite literally, say anything. I've seen comments that demean and insult other posters, threaten to kill public officials, incite violence against people of color and suggest that women in positions of political power should be raped in order to take them down a notch.

This misanthropic pack feeds on its own negative energy, encouraged by those who make good money stoking the fires of hatred and dissent.

In a recent column published in the Detroit Free Press, Leonard Pitts, Jr. called for an end to anonymous comments:

"As any student of Sociology 101 can tell you, when people don't have to account for what they say or do, they will often say and do things that would shock their better selves." (Detroit Free Press, April 2, 2010)

Our better selves. That's how we turn back this wave of anger and resentment. We show our better selves. We challenge bullies. We condemn the use of violent or abusive rhetoric. We model civility and kindness.

I doubt newspapers will ever require people to attach their names to comments. It's a logistical nightmare, and virtually unregulated comment sections boost Web site traffic. But I moderate. I delete spam, personal insults, foul language, death threats and violent rhetoric. I do it openly and without any sense that I am violating anyone's right to free speech.

Constitutionally, I may be wrong. Morally, this feels absolutely right.

The price of the matzo

2010-04-03T07:21:00.000-07:00

Seven years ago, I celebrated my first Passover. I felt very bad that my Jewish husband couldn't have birthday cake, which happens when his birthday falls within the holiday.

Looking back now, I believe that empathy drove me to travel the eight-day journey with him. Together, we stayed away from bread, grains, anything that has to be combined with water and left to stand before it is baked. He explained that when the Jews fled Egypt after the 10 plagues convinced Pharaoh to let them go, they had no time even to let bread dough rise.

I had no real understanding of the holiday, and more than anything, I was reminded how much I love eating baked goods.

But after all this time, I've come to keep Passover for a very different reason.

Every year, I love hearing about the epic journey, the sheer majesty of generational survival under horrific conditions. I have always been a fan of the underdog, those magnificent souls who are beaten down again and again, and rise, and rise again, until at last, they reach the Promised Land.

I love dipping my fork in red wine and marking my small plate to remember the plagues, and to think about the times in my life that I have felt deliverance from pain and suffering.

I love eating the ceremonial foods - the bitter herbs, the salt water, the charoset - that symbolize Israel's enslavement, and then feasting on brisket and potato kugel and carrot tzimis and remembering for every lean, hungry year of my life, there have been many more years of wealth and plenty.

Every day without bread and cookies and all the foods I love and choose to not eat, I am reminded that sacrifice has meaning, that pain is inevitable and suffering is optional.

This perspective informs my faith. It reinforces my values. I hear people born into immense privilege complain about how they've been persecuted, and others claim they are slaves to the government, because a portion of their hard-earned income is taken up by taxes.

And I want to say to them, "Call me when you've built a pyramid for a ruthless dictator. Call me when the only compensation you receive is basic sustenance and a place to live that someone else owns."

Slaves? Persecution? Please.

Passover reminds me that pain arcs across all generations. It reminds me no oppressive force is more powerful than faith and love.

And that perspective is well worth the price of the matzo.

Meet a compassionate fool

2010-03-24T19:29:00.000-07:00

Today, someone called me a compassionate fool, and my self-esteem shot up a hundred points.

I know this person meant to insult me over my support of health care reform. But I felt as though I had been paid the highest compliment. I think this verse from the New Testament Book of Luke explains it best:

Blessed are you when men hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man.

I was raised Christian. It's been years since I last set foot inside a church for anything except a funeral or a wedding. But I remember hearing a minister talk about being a fool for Jesus. Preaching to everyone he saw about Jesus' love. Sharing G-d's for all humankind. Being kind, cheerful, optimistic. Giving everything he had to the poor. Caring for the sick and elderly. Having compassion for his enemies.

Compassion. There's that word again.

People talk about how government excludes Christianity, about the "war on Christmas," the persecution of Christians in America. And now, when government is trying to do exactly as Jesus taught, they want it overthrown. Some are getting terribly ugly about it. Some folks in Congress are defending the bullies, and worse, encouraging them.

Now, I've read the Bible a few times, and I don't think any of that is even close to what Jesus would do.

Jesus embodied the word "compassion." Everywhere he went, time after time, he shared a message of love, of forgiveness, of caring for the sick and poor, and most of all, treating our brothers and sisters as we would have them treat us.

I try to live up to that example every day. I fail, over and over again. But I will - most happily - be called a fool for it.

AAUW study: Girls start well, lose ground in STEM degrees and careers

2010-03-23T19:16:00.000-07:00

Thirty years ago, teen boys were 13 times more likely than girls to score above 700 on the SAT math exam; today that ratio has shrunk to about 3:1.

Since 1990, boys and girls have taken an almost identical number of high school math and science credits.

Why, then, are so few women pursuing degrees in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) and moving on to careers in those fields? Why do young women tend to evaluate themselves as being less competent in science and math, all evidence to the contrary? Why do so many girls take science and math classes in high school, and so few take those courses in college?

The American Association has addressed those questions - and many more - in a new study, Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, presented quite appropriately on Ada Lovelace Day. The event was established last year by a group of bloggers interested in celebrating the achievements of women in technology and science. In the mid-19th century, Mrs. Lovelace translated an article on inventor Charles Babbage's Analytical Machine, and her own notes include an algorithm widely regarded as the first computer program. (You can read more about her here and here and here.)

One of the most interesting parallels between Mrs. Lovelace and the AAUW's 2010 study lies in how she became such a devoted student of mathematics. While some natural ability may certainly have played a role, her mother made a devoted and concerted effort to see her daughter not follow in the footsteps of her father, the poet Lord Byron. Young Ada received tutoring in mathematics and music, and was strongly encouraged by the relationship she formed with Babbage, when she was just 17.

Imagine, at a time when women were still considered the property of their husbands, when families prepared their daughters for marriage, not careers, Ada Lovelace was a mathematician, largely because her mother insisted. That kind of dedicated encouragement and focus, the AAUW reports, can make a huge difference in whether girls pursue science and math:

"One finding shows that when teachers and parents tell girls that their intelligence can expand with experience and learning, girls do better on math tests and are more likely to say they want to continue to study math in the future. That is, believing in the potential for intellectual growth, in and of itself, improves outcomes (my emphasis)."

Environment also plays a role in secondary education. The report concludes universities and colleges can take steps - such as mentoring programs and a more supportive working environment for parents - to encourage women to enter STEM fields.

In addition, despite critical gains made in securing equal opportunities for women, implicit biases in education and the workplace deliver a mixed message: Women have the right to pursue any career, but some careers "belong" to men. Though challenged by studies explored in the report, common stereotypes persist about girls being less able in science and math. While the number of girls identified as "mathematically gifted" has skyrocketed, growth in women pursuing math careers has stalled.

Women add needed perspective

Why is it so important to move women into STEM careers? Besides tapping a wealth of natural talent that might previously gone undiscovered, women bring a female perspective to innovation, creativity and invention, ensuring that women's needs and wishes are represented. The study cites two inventions, a voice-recognition software and air bags, that excluded and even endangered women, because they were developed by predominantly male groups.

In addition, the study points out that STEM careers usually offer higher pay. If more women choose higher paying fields, we may see a reduction in America's persistent gender wage gap.

To me, though, creating a culture that welcomes women in STEM fields is about something far more important: Keeping a promise to our daughters, the promise of an unfettered and unlimited future.

The AAUW has packed an incredible amount of information, conducted by meticulous researchers, into this report. The organization will host a live Web cast at 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday, March 24, 2010, to discuss it. Register on their Web site. And you can download a PDF of the 134-page study by clicking here. Fair warning, they ask for your name and email address before the download.

Seems a small price to pay.

Driving myself to the gym and other liberal sacrifices

2010-03-19T18:53:00.000-07:00

All this week, I've been driving myself to the gym.

It's two blocks away.

Now, before you judge me, consider this: I've been there four days this week, and in the previous four months, I hadn't set foot inside the place more than three times.

Intellectually, I know burning the gas, polluting the environment and adding to the 90,000+ miles on my Pontiac Sunfire all make these trips incredibly wasteful. Add to this the gorgeous walking weather after a long, Michigan winter and the guilt piles up pretty quick.

But the guilt hasn't stopped me. Neither has the voice in my head that scolds me for being a lazy bum.

In a recent email exchange, a friend who is also on a healthier path these days wrote about how difficult it is to be a good liberal person and still manage to feed a family with relatively healthful foods. She wants to buy fresh fruits and vegetables, but can't find any grown local this time of year, so she ends up buying goods that have been shipped in from lord-knows-where. And that's bad for the planet.

She wrote: "For now, conscious eating is going to be totally health-focused... Then, when we've got that addressed, I'll start worrying about 'good for the planet' at the same time that I worry about 'good for me.'."

That's right where I am. Almost two weeks ago, I made a conscious decision to eat better and exercise more. I joined a health-focused Web site and am tracking my nutrition and exercise. I have goals. One of those goals is to exercise at least 90 minutes every week.

And if I have to drive myself to the gym to hit that goal... well, then that's what I have to do. It occurs to me at least one group of lawmakers will be doing the same thing this weekend.

On Sunday, Congress is expected to take up a health care reform bill, and the vote will make pro-choice lawmakers cringe as they cast their ballot. They'll be approving language that restricts abortion rights to address the concerns of anti-choice lawmakers, who have stonewalled health care reforms for months. As author Katha Pollitt pointed out in an essay published by The Nation, while anti-choice lawmakers refused to budge, their pro-choice counterparts stepped back, to reform health care and expand access to another 30 million people.

It seems counter-intuitive for advocates - ardent, passionate advocates - to give up the fight. And one might look at both sides and call one better than the other for standing firm.

I could be standing firm in my devotion to fiscal responsibility and environmental protection. And I would go into the second half of my life facing an increased risk of diabetes, heart disease and a host of other diseases related to poor nutrition and fitness.

My choice was so much easier than theirs. I don't risk losing my job or being vilified by thousands who disagree with my actions.

But the principle is the same.

I don't know when the idea of sacrificing principle for the greater good fell out of favor, but I'd like to bring it back.

And just to show I'm not bound by any particular mindset, I think I'll walk to the gym tomorrow. Although I heard it might rain.

Barbie™, meet The White House Project

2010-03-13T11:27:00.000-08:00

Now, you know I love The White House Project. I love The White House Project so much that I'm committed to raising $1,000 this year to support their work in Michigan. (You can help by making a contribution of any amount here, and type "Joni Hubred-Golden" into the "Member name" box. Even $10 will help us train more women to take on positions of leadership!)

For those of you who've missed out, The White House Project is a non-partisan, non-profit organization created by Marie Wilson, co-founder of Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day®. TWHP's simply stated goal is to "advance women’s leadership in all communities and sectors, up to the U.S. presidency". It's not about replacing men in office with women, it's about creating a "critical mass" of women leaders who can help change the face of our government and our society.

I don't think anyone would argue the need for change. Several recent studies have shown that while we are more than half the population, women hold less than 20 percent of leadership positions in the U.S., across all sectors. Changing the face of leadership will mean engaging people and exploring ideas that might not fit with my personal tastes or values.

And so it was that I initially recoiled in horror when I received this email:

"As part of our continuing collaboration with Barbie™, The White House Project is happy to aid Barbie™ in their search for 10 mentees for 10 mentors!"

Oh. My.

Barbie™, whose absurd measurements have egregiously distorted our perception of healthy female body proportions.

Barbie™, whose feet were molded to fit spike-heels, whose wardrobe consisted largely of skimpy costumes and bathing suits, whose legendary dependence on make-up includes an irrational obsession with black eyeliner.

Barbie™, in partnership with The White House Project.

And then I thought, well... wouldn't Ruth Handler be proud?

If you have never read about Barbie™'s mother, the woman who thought young girls should be playing with dolls that had breasts, please take some time to read a brief biography.

Mrs. Handler's ideas and energy led to the creation and success of Mattel toy company in the 1940s, but she initially received no recognition for her efforts. After creating the iconic doll that propelled Mattel forward, she ascended to the company presidency, but became less active in operations due in part to a breast cancer diagnosis. In the 1970s, company leaders made bad decisions that landed Mattel in hot water. Eventually, Mrs. Handler, her husband and a financial manager were convicted of charges filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Through all of those trials, Mrs. Handler continued to lead and innovate. She helped create a program to connect white collar criminals with community service opportunities and turned her desire for a better post-mastectomy prosthetic into a business that created them. She also had a creative role in adapting Barbie™ to reflect the unique culture of young girls.

Since her creation in 1959, Barbie™ has not aged, but she has definitely changed. Her physique, while still disproportionate, is a little less distorted. Mattel has added the accoutrements of high-powered careers to her line of accessories. Now, she can earn that "dream house" and sports car.

A few months ago, Barbie™ selected "10 Women to Watch in 2010," accomplished professional leaders who have each generously volunteered to mentor a girl for one day this year. The girls will share their experiences, to inspire other girls to succeed and lead. You can learn more about the mentors and nominate a girl at icanbementor.com.

I have to admit, it's a brilliant plan. And it does my heart good to know Marie Wilson will be one of those mentors.

We all change and grow over the years, and sometimes it's hard for the people around us to accept that. You lose weight and get healthy, change your hair style or color, you start wearing "power suits" or thinking a different way, and the people you love might wonder just what you're up to. They may even feel a little threatened.

But making a change for the better is something everyone should support. It's something we should all applaud and encourage.

So Barbie™, you go girl. I'm right behind you, all the way.

International Women's Day: Michigan focus

2010-03-09T20:22:00.000-08:00

As I scanned blog posts and articles about International Women's Day March 8, I was struck by the volume of women's voices all over the world. But one post, more than any other, inspired me to change the way I think about this holiday.

In "Does International Women's Day matter in the U.S.?," Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner works around an idea that has popped up on my radar screen again and again over the past year. The co-founder and executive director of MomsRising.org quotes a friend, who said:

"There's a real disconnect between our desire as parents to tell our girls that they can do anything they want to do in life, and the reality of the challenges that they will later face as women in our own nation."

She cites our drop of four places in the World Economic Forum's gender equality rankings, released late last year. Iceland tops the list. Two-thirds of countries showed progress in women's equality. And according to the WEF, we're not among them. Here's why:

The U.S. has always done well on measures of education and economic participation, but has been held back by mediocre scores in women's health and political achievement. The U.S. gap in political empowerment is below the world's average, having closed only 14% of its gap. This year, small changes in economic opportunity--female labor force participation and wage equality fell slightly--pushed the U.S. down the list.

The U.S. was ranked 23rd in 2006. Now, we're behind LITHUANIA. But the reasons got my attention, because they sounded really familiar: Labor force participation. Wage equality. Political empowerment. These same issues have been cited in recent reports on the status and needs of Michigan women.

Inforum, a prestigious business forum representing women, recently released their 2009 Women's Leadership Index, which showed while women hold more than half of all supervisory and management positions, they are barely represented among the highest earners and on boards of directors in Michigan's top 100 companies. Inforum president Terry Barclay told members of the Women Officials Network last week that in Michigan, as large companies are coming out of bankruptcy and others struggle just to stay afloat, efforts to ensure diversity appear to have taken a back seat.

Men still dominate in politics, no matter where you look. In Congress, women hold only 17 percent of seats, despite representing more than 50 percent of the population. Representation is slightly better in Michigan, just over 20 percent, but many of those women are term limited. And not enough women are in the political pipeline to replace them.

Women also struggle with health issues here, as they do across the country. The National Women's Law Center reports our state has one of the worst rates of maternal deaths for every 1,000 live births, 13 times worse than Maine, which has the least number of deaths. According to an ABC News report, the U.S. ranks behind 40 other countries in this area.

We're slipping, in Michigan and throughout the United States. And that's important to notice, because when women lose ground, families lose ground. At a public forum last year, I learned a startling fact: Women almost never arrive at homeless shelters and other agencies alone. They bring children, grandchildren, even elderly family members.

A number of coalitions and organizations in Michigan and across the country are working to improve women's lives. That's why I've established Michigan Women's Media, Inc., a non-profit news organization that will raise awareness about issues, as well as the visibility of organizations working for women. It is also why I've pledged this year to raise funds for The White House Project, an organization that offers non-partisan training to any woman interested in running for political office.

And I no longer think of International Women's Day as a time to look only around the globe. Because what's happening closer to home matters, too. And in some ways, it matters more.

-- Joni Hubred-Golden

How not to treat a juror

2010-03-03T20:41:00.000-08:00

Dear Judge Bowman,

I hardly know where to begin.

Carmela Khury did nothing to deserve the treatment she received in your court. She's the mother of two young children, Caroline, 3, Max, 8 months, also called to jury duty. And she had it covered, sir. She was prepared to do her civic duty, to the point of hiring a nanny to fill in for her mother, who was having oral surgery.

And then, as so often happens in life, her best-laid plans fell through. But as you well know, she still managed to get to the courthouse, even though she had to bring her children along.

Because she showed up late (under the threat of arrest if she failed to appear), you decided she had committed a crime, one that warranted her spending a night in jail.

Thrown in with people who have broken the law by driving drunk or bouncing checks or shoplifting.

Away from Caroline and Max.

Because she showed up late, after not being able to find anyone to watch her children.

More than 475,000 children in Michigan under the age of six have parents who work. There are 328,730 women in Michigan's workforce with children at home. Nearly 85,000 of them have had a baby in the last 12 months. Those women deal with child care issues every day. Major snowfall becomes a logistical nightmare. A sick child means taking a personal or sick day, perhaps losing pay.

Our work places are not really family-friendly. And now, it appears, neither are our courts.

The Free Press reported that you asked Ms. Khury whether she had "learned her lesson." What lesson would that be, sir? What lesson were you trying to teach her by imposing such a harsh punishment after she did her best to get to your courtroom and do her civic duty?

I can't figure it out. And you told Fox 2 News today that you won't comment.

So instead, I am left to wonder what you'll do next, and to hope that others will learn from your terrible example how not to treat a juror.

If we require citizens to serve, then shouldn't we find a way to support those citizens in service?

Two great celebrations: National Reading Month & Women's History Month

2010-03-01T20:25:00.000-08:00

Combine Women's History Month with National Reading Month, and you've got a compelling reason to read more about Michigan women. Here are a few of my favorite books (and be sure to leave a comment with your favorites!):

Women's Great Lakes Reader
Lighthouse keepers, fur traders, cooks, wives and mothers - women from all walks of life have traveled to the Great Lakes region over the past 200 years. Some stayed only a short time, others made interesting and often challenging lives. Their stories, collected by Grand Valley State University Professor Victoria Brehm in The Women's Great Lakes Reader, reveal a wide range of voices and experiences, from the poetry and travelogues to letters and diary entries about life in mining camps and homesteads around the shores of these vast bodies of water. Read more

Bold Women in Michigan History
Virginia Law Burns tells a dozen of those stories in Bold Women in Michigan History (Mountain Press 2006), described by Gladys Beckwith, the grand dame of women's history in Michigan, as "thoroughly readable and well-researched." The women Burns chose are well served by her carefully documented research, as well as the way in which she describes their lives and contributions. And her readers are well served by the book's illustrations, which include a map of referenced locations, its rich bibliography and list of historic sites. This is the kind of book a young person could take on a family vacation trip up north, in order to learn a little something along the way. Read more

Bold Spirit: Helga Estby's Forgotten Walk across Victorian America
Norwegian immigrant Helga Estby's entire life seems to have prepared her for the stunning adventure she undertook in the late 1800s, to prove not only her own strength, but that of all women. Estby's cross-country walk across the U.S., with her eldest daughter Clara, is documented in Bold Spirit, a historic account patched together by author Linda Lawrence Hunt. Despite the destruction of Estby's careful notes, her letters and sketches, along with the Estby children's lifelong condemnation of their mother's story, Hunt crafts a convincing story.
A "rag rug" patchwork of news stories, a deep and fascinating knowledge of women's history and conversations with Thelma Estby, who was committed to preserving her family's stories, make Bold Spirit an interesting read. Helga was a true American pioneer, emigrating to Manistee, Michigan from Norway at age 11, at a time when Manistee's citizens were fully involved in the question of women's suffrage. Read more

A very different abortion discussion

2010-02-22T19:41:00.000-08:00

I have room in my head for all kinds of ideas.

I believe women can be trusted to hold opposing views about abortion and still come up with a coherent public policy agenda that protects both women and children. I haven't seen anything close yet, but I have hope.

Still, I was absolutely floored to come across this label in my Twitter feed on February 21: #livetweetingabortion. Angie, a 27-year-old mom from Florida, used it to identify her tweets while she waited for medication to end her four-week-old pregnancy.

Floored is the wrong word. I was horrified.

To be clear, I was equally horrified when @HenryFordNews live-tweeted surgery. Some things just feel like they don't belong in my Twitter stream.

But something about this woman's conversation drew me in. She wasn't proud or defensive or particularly defiant with people who criticized her (and there were plenty). She was simply confident in her decision. And tired of the idea she should be ashamed of it.

Angie created a video and blog posts to explain what she was doing and why. Her intent had nothing to do with the pro-choice/anti-choice arguments. It was to take having an abortion out of the closet.

We debate the abortion issue, but women do not talk about their abortions. And considering a million happen ever year, that's a lot of not talking.

In a blog entry, Angie wrote:

Why don’t we talk about this more? Well, because we’ve been taught not to. By the women (and men involved) before us who didn’t talk about their abortions, by the religious right who told us we were whores for wanting to enjoy sex without the punishment of pregnancy and childbirth, and by the left who hung their heads in sorrow that people 'had to' get abortions.

Yes, Angie's holding us all in contempt, even those on the left who say they support a woman's right to choose, but still somehow manage to make her feel like she's done something... not quite right.

Angie's telling us her abortion is not a sad thing and not a cause for celebration and not something she feels compelled to hide out of fear or shame.

It's just what she felt she needed to do, for her own health and well-being.

Very few people commenting on her posts talk about that. Instead, most (especially those on the anti-choice side) have dragged out the same, tired arguments that never get us anywhere. The arguments we will never, ever resolve.

Angie has presented us with a new paradigm, a whole new field for discussion. And I hope it moves well beyond #livetweetingabortion.

The challenges we face, the choices we make

2010-02-20T11:56:00.000-08:00

Say what you want about celebri-pol Sarah Palin. I'm not going to write about her. Enough, as someone once said, is enough.

Instead, I have spent some time learning more about Andrea Fay Friedman, a talented actress who has Down syndrome. Her big break came on the 1990s family drama "Life Goes On," playing opposite Chris Burke, another actor with Down syndrome. Together, they transformed the way our culture sees people with developmental disabilities.

On a recent episode of the biting satirical cartoon sitcom "Family Guy," Ms. Friedman played Ellen, a potential love interest for the family's hapless teen-aged son, Chris. I've never watched the show, because it's really not my brand of humor. But I wanted to see what all the fuss was about. (If you missed the fuss, you can read about it here.)

Stewie, the most obnoxious cartoon baby ever drawn, makes disparaging remarks about Ellen's appearance and mocks her unique hugging style. Later, Chris lets loose with a rant and hurls some choice words at Ellen that reference stereotypes about her disability.

At one point, Ellen says her parents are an accountant and "the former governor of Alaska," an obvious reference to Ms. Palin and the fact that she has a child with Down syndrome. Except that Trig is a boy. And Todd Palin isn't an accountant.

But I digress.

The show also proffers the idea that people with Down syndrome are just like everyone else. A disability is a condition, not a definition. That same message came from "Life Goes On", albeit with a kinder, gentler delivery

While Ms. Palin set about spinning this into an attack on her son, Ms. Friedman has reminded us she doesn't need or want anyone's pity.

In an interview with New York Times Arts beat blogger Dave Itzkoff, Ms. Friedman talked about her life and career, as well as her role on "Family Guy". Answering a question about whether she was uncomfortable playing characters with Down syndrome, she said this:

"No, I’m proud of it. I’m not embarrassed. But mostly, it doesn’t matter if you have Down syndrome. Really, it just matters to have a different challenge."

Here is an almost 40 year old woman who has made a career of showing us Down syndrome is just another challenge. She has been on stage since age 14. Worked at the same law firm for the past 20 years. Spoken to audiences all over the world. Learned how to speak Japanese.

While others argue over whether the role she played was offensive, Andrea Fay Friedman proves every day that words are just words and what counts is what you do with your life.

No matter what challenges you face.

10 Women Who Influenced My Life

2010-02-16T20:05:00.000-08:00

"Behind every woman is ... a great woman."

That's how Karen Keller, Michigan blogger, personal coach and influence expert, started a recent blog post. (Read it here.)

She got me thinking about the women who have influenced my life. It was tough to get down to 10, because I have been inspired by so many women. But here are the ones who helped form the foundation of my 51-year adventure on earth:

1. Ida Thompson, my grandmother, often told us stories about traveling across country in a wagon to settle in Minnesota and about raising my father on the family farm. She ended her marriage to my alcoholic grandfather at a time when women just didn't leave their husbands. She sent her teen-aged son to live with nearby relatives, at a time when mothers didn't send their children away. When my own marriage blew up, and my children lived apart from me, I knew I would survive, because she did.

2. Olive Hanson influenced my life both directly and indirectly, as my mother's spiritual mentor. I spent many wonderful mornings and afternoons at her house, drawing Bible verses from the ceramic loaf of bread on her kitchen table and peeking around the corner as she and my mother prayed together. Thanks to her, I was raised with foundational values that guide my path even now.

3. I first saw the Sound of Music on the big screen when I was eight years old, and fell in love with the story, the score and Julie Andrews. While embodying grace and elegance, she also has a comedic talent that brings her down to earth. She's one of the few women I truly admire for the way she models celebrity.

4. Geraldine Ferraro ran with Minnesota's favorite son Walter Mondale at a time when I was hip deep in raising children and dazzled by the patriotism Ronald Reagan inspired. I didn't think much about her candidacy until the 2008 Presidential election. She was the first woman to suffer the slings and arrows of a sexist society, judged by her gender and her husband's finances as much as her voting record and service in Congress. She went first, and whether or not I knew at the time, showed me it could be done.

5. I didn't vote for Hillary Clinton, but I deeply admire her brilliant political mind and extraordinary emotional and spiritual strength, her drive to make the world a better place, her fearlessness, her thick skin and her life-long commitment to service.

6. At age 16, my daughter came to me and said she wanted to enroll in an adult education program, so she could work full-time while earning her high school degree. She's braver and tougher and smarter than I am, and when I grow up, I want to be just like her.

7. I started reading Erma Bombeck's newspaper columns, then moved on to her books. I was only a teenager, but I found her humor and style naturally engaging. She transformed mundane life experiences into pure entertainment with her gift. She's the reason I became a writer.

8. Harriet, the Spy, although a fictional character, taught me about human nature and the fact that you can never judge people by the pieces of their lives most visible to the world. She's the other reason I became a writer.

9. Mrs. Swenson, my fifth grade teacher, had gorgeous auburn hair and always dressed to the nines. She was patient, kind and gave me the best advice I ever got from any teacher: "Don't make a mountain out of a molehill."

10. My mother and her three older sisters were orphaned when mom was six. All four girls married, raised families and now have grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Three of four are widowed. All still live in their own homes, though the eldest are well into their 80s. My mother, youngest of the four, taught me self-reliance and after my father passed, showed me what it means to both survive and thrive.

Those are my 10. Who are yours?

Miss America, Rush and me

2010-02-03T14:04:00.000-08:00

I found out today that Rush Limbaugh and I have something in common: We've both judged pageants affiliated with the Miss America organization.

His was the national event. Mine was Miss Oakland County. But still.

Having been part of the process, I can tell you the young women who get involved put their hearts and souls on the line. They do not get by on looks alone. Judges also measure the platforms they choose, their service to the community, their intelligence and insights.

After my experience, I wrote a column promoting those ideals.

After Rush's experience, he went on national television and said this:

"I love the women’s movement — especially when walking behind it."

Rush called himself a huge supporter of women, and said what he opposes is feminism.

So let's define feminism, shall we? According to Merriam-Webster.com, feminism is "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes" or "organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests".

From this, one might conclude that Rush is opposed to the idea that women deserve equal rights. I'm not going there. Based on what I've read and heard, his only purpose is generalized liberal and Democrat bashing. Which is fine, except that plenty of conservative women and men are also feminists.

Now, Rush knows this. He knows about Feminists for Life, he knows about the Independent Women's Forum.

He just doesn't care. Because he knows something far more important:

His listeners are almost overwhelmingly conservative men.

So he gets away with lumping all feminists together under the umbrella of man-haters and ugly women. From a 2004 Media Matters report:

Some of these babes, I'm telling you, like the sexual harassment crowd. They're out there protesting what they actually wish would happen to them sometimes. [4/26/04]

And more recently, from ThinkProgress.org:

You know, there’s a crisis of young man-boy education in the schools. And they did this on purpose, to eliminate male competition in the work force. This is part of feminazi grand plan.[5/21/08]

He also gets away with it because Americans have largely pigeon-holed the word feminism to the point where more than a few feminist women don't even want to be attached to it. I know. I've talked to them.

We are divided about feminism, because so much political baggage has been attached to the word. We are not divided about equality. And it's time for everyone to stand up and say so.

That's right. I'm talking to you, Miss America pageant officials.

After my pageant judging experience, I gained a whole new respect for your organization. I lost some of it when I learned you had chosen Rush Limbaugh as a judge. And I will lose it all if you remain silent about his tasteless, boorish remarks.

O, Pioneers

2010-02-01T19:08:00.000-08:00

It's always entertaining to watch people react after Governor Jennifer Granholm takes a bold step. Or any sized step at all. In any direction.

After eight years, people are so fed up with Michigan government, they don't care what she says. They don't like it. It won't work. We don't need it.

If she recounts how the previous administration paved the way for Michigan's epic economic disaster, she's shirking responsibility. If she extols the virtues of her own administration, she's taking too much credit.

The woman can't win.

In fact, very few women in politics get to "win," so to speak. The most visible are routinely vilified, ridiculed or stereotyped as air-headed, shrill, sexy or bitchy.

And it stands to reason. These are our pioneers.

Throughout feminist history, every woman who has stepped up, spoken out and put herself on the line has suffered some consequence. Have you watched Iron Jawed Angels? Do it. Every woman should. We need perspective about what we have, and what it cost.

When a woman steps in the spotlight or claims a life of public service, she is paving the way for the rest of us. Even if you don't like the decisions they make or the positions they take, Debbie Stabenow, Candace Miller, Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, Jennifer Granholm and all of our women state legislators - are working not only for their constituents, but for all women in Michigan.

Amongst themselves, they will work out their political differences and serve the folks who elected them. They will also remind us how important it is for women to step up, to lead in our own homes and communities.

They remind us to raise our voices and be heard.

Once again this year, I'm committed to raising $1,000 for The White House Project, a non-partisan organization that offers workshops to provide women with the tools they need to be a part of the public process.

You can help train more women to raise their voices - through Go, Run or Debate Boot Camp training offered by The White House Project. Scholarships are offered, and even assistance with child care. Every contribution, of every size, is valued and will be put to work in the service of Michigan women. Here's how you can help:

* Drop a check or money order payable to The White House Project into an envelope addressed to Michigan Women's Forum, P.O. Box 921, Farmington MI 48332-0921. I'll forward all contributions to Shannon Garrett, The White House Project's Michigan director.

* Click here to visit White House Project donation site. You can make a secure contribution of any size. Under "Please credit this gift to", enter "Joni Hubred-Golden".

Remember, every contribution is tax deductible.

What's worse than a sexist comment?

2010-01-27T17:19:00.000-08:00

I almost laughed out loud when I read the furor over Senator Arlen Specter's "act like a lady" comment, flung at Representative Michele Bachmann during a heated public debate.

RNC Co-Chair Jan Larimer denounced Specter's statements as "demeaning to all women." (And thanks to Ms. Larimer for speaking on behalf of all women, because that is so not demeaning or sexist.) What's more, she huffed, people in Senator Specter's home state of Pennsylvania should throw him out of office come election day.

For making a sexist comment during a heated political debate. Really?

Not that long ago, Larimer's party issued a carefully considered statement that suggested General McChrystal should put Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi "in her place". And when Democrats expressed the same outrage over sexism, Republicans blamed Democrats for trying to shift the political conversation.

If we learned nothing else from the 2008 elections, we learned that sexism permeates every aspect of American politics. Some people revel in it, some deliberately try to hide it. I think most of us just don't recognize it in ourselves, until it sneaks out in some terribly obvious way.

Senator Alan Specter is not a sexist lawmaker. He made a sexist remark. And he has apologized privately to Rep. Bachmann, as well he should. His comment has no place in a civilized political debate. But neither do any of the statements made by Republican operatives and Rep. Bachmann, portraying her as the victim of sexism.

Let's be clear: Anyone who really wanted to talk gender discrimination would not be hand-wringing over an off-the-cuff statement made during a political argument.

If politicians really want to talk about sexism, they should ask why women still earn only about 70 percent of the wages men earn and why that percentage is even lower for women of color. (http://www.pay-equity.org)

Or why Republicans have such abysmally small numbers of women representing their interests in Congress - not that Democrats are doing much better.(http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22342.html)

Or why we say we believe women leaders are just as capable as men, but women hold fewer than 20 percent of leadership positions across the board. (http://benchmarks.thewhitehouseproject.org/)

Only one thing is worse than sexism rearing its ugly head in the heat of a political debate: Using it to score cheap political points, rather than a springboard to meaningful conversations about improving women's lives.

Serious problems, silly legislators

2010-01-22T19:58:00.000-08:00

I've been thinking quite a bit today about Rep. Paul Scott, a Republican from Grand Blanc, Michigan.

Rep. Scott announced his candidacy for Secretary of State, and among the items on his platform is this:

I will make it a priority to ensure transgender individuals will not be allowed to change the sex on their driver’s license in any circumstance.

Just so you know, state law allows transgendered people to make the necessary changes to their driver's licenses, so Rep. Scott would start out his career as Secretary of State by breaking that law. He would most certainly provoke a federal lawsuit, because federal law prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities, and gender dysphoria is classified as a disability (Thanks to the Michigan Messenger for their research and publication of this information, I had no idea.)

I suppose one might excuse Rep. Scott for not knowing much about existing law. After all, he's only been in office a little over a year.

That's right, Rep. Scott has served out only half of his first term as representative for House District 51. And he hasn't just targeted transgendered folks with his "I want small government, but not so small that I can't legislate your morality" point of view.
He also signed onto a bill that would change Michigan's state constitution to give a fertilized egg personhood. That would mean (among a vast array of other consequences) the end of all abortions, even those considered medically necessary to save the life of the mother.

Now in my opinion, the decision about when life begins seems outside the purview of the State of Michigan, or the federal government, for that matter. But something else disturbs me more.

While Rep. Scott and his colleagues were writing laws to protect fertilized eggs, children already here are suffering as never before. According to the most recent Kids Count report, more than 22 percent of Michigan children under the age of 5 live in poverty.

While the folks in my school district are trying to decide which elementary schools to close and what services to cut, Rep. Scott has the time to worry about who might be emotionally scarred for life at the sight of a transgendered person using a gendered rest room.

We have serious problems in Michigan. And we have no time to waste on nonsense like this, coming from a guy who can't even be bothered to focus all of his attention on the job he was hired to do, before trying to work his way up the political ladder.

A feminist is a feminist is...

2010-01-21T19:54:00.000-08:00

I'm meeting more and more women who hold political views different from my own, but are also absolutely committed to women's equality.

This does not surprise me. It delights me.

The percentage of women elected to the Michigan legislature and the U.S. Congress is small; the number of Republican women is infinitesimal. And they know it. In an article published at politico.com last spring, the likes of Senator Olympia Snowe and Rep. Marilyn Musgrave talked about the "shrinking minority" and the lack of visibility that keeps Republican women from running for office. With few role models, they can't see themselves stepping forward to serve.

That's why I support The White House Project as a member of the Michigan cabinet. I've committed to raise $1,000, which will fund workshops and other events that encourage women of all political backgrounds to run for office. Keep an eye out this year; workshops will be offered in the nuts and bolts of political campaigning and the gentle art of debate.

We need more women in the pipeline like my new-found friend, who understands that what matters is equality. What matters is not so much what we believe, but that we speak our truth.

Senator Whitmer withdraws - and thank goodness

2010-01-20T18:00:00.000-08:00

State Senator Gretchen Whitmer (D-East Lansing) has come to a decision that cuts at the heart of what it is to be a woman in political life.

In a statement released earlier today, she invoked the Mantra of Motherhood: The children come first. As well they should.

I am very glad she launched her campaign; a little disappointed, but equally pleased to see her withdraw. Disappointed, because Whitmer is a crackerjack lawmaker with great ideas and a passion for this state. Pleased, because she had the courage to do the right thing for herself and her family.

As a state legislator, Whitmer no doubt has a busy life, but it's also well-defined. She is only obligated to serve and campaign within the confines of her district. Running for state-wide office vastly expanded the boundaries of her campaign, and that proved too much for the divorced mother of two. A statement published on her campaign Web site cited her children as her only reason for dropping out:

"As I have traveled our state, it has become clear to me that this rigorous campaign schedule and pursuit cannot continue if I am to be the best mother I can to my six and seven year old daughters. At this critical time in their lives, my girls need their mom to be there to pick them up from school, read to them at bedtime, and help them with homework. It is with this in mind that I have decided to withdraw my name from consideration for the Office of Attorney General."

Some will say Whitmer should have thought about her daughters before pursuing state-wide office. When you hear those words, remember this: No woman (or man, for that matter) ever achieved success without trying many things that didn't work. And no woman - not a single one - should ever be criticized when she strives toward a goal that turns out to be just outside her reach.

Sen. Whitmer should be congratulated and supported in her decision. Her constituents - and her children - are lucky to have her.

The Midlife Feminist

2010-01-19T18:38:00.000-08:00

As usual, I'm late to the party.

I spent most of my life as a feminist by default. I didn't know how to be anything else. In my world, women have always had the right to vote. Women have always been encouraged to go to college, to let their intelligence shine. Women have always had reproductive choice, including access to birth control and abortion. Women have always been encouraged to break barriers, to open doors so the rest of us could continue to walk right through.

For the longest time, I took all that for granted. I can't any more.

Consider this: The last presidential election saw women at the top of each ticket, and the campaigns were sexist slug-fests. Media Matters and the Women's Media Center created "Sexism Sells, But We're Not Buying It" in May 2008 to draw attention to the steady stream of blatantly gendered comments.

And this: The battle over health care reform was brought to a standstill over an amendment to prevent women from even using their own hard-earned dollars to purchase insurance that would cover abortion.

And this: During the campaign for Massachusetts' U.S. Senate seat, someone at a rally for Republican Scott Brown yelled out a vile comment that suggested raping Brown's opponent, Martha Coakley. Brown has yet to denounce the comment. Says he didn't hear it. He also has had nothing to say about equally vile comments posted on Ms. Coakley's Facebook page (via msnbc.com): "... 'Scott Brown should rape Martha Coakley and then deny her emergency contraception'. 'Martha Coakley getting raped would complete my life.' 'Abortion is wrong. Kill her.' After one message that states 'Looking forward to the rally Friday, Martha,' a woman named Amelia Bosley writes: 'Hope she gets shot.' Imagine putting your name to that in the name of political change."

We live in troubled times. Having broken myriad barriers, women now struggle with the difference between what we thought we'd have and what we've gotten, with the Law of Unintended Consequences. New conflicts between women over social and cultural issues seem to have shoved the Battle of the Sexes off stage.

In "Woman's Half-Century of Evolution," Susan B. Anthony expressed her opposition to Elizabeth Cady Stanton's position that women should become involved in issues other than suffrage, which Mrs. Stanton felt would require the combined wisdom of women and men to resolve:

I have maintained my original attitude, believing that for the leaders of the work for women suffrage to identify themselves with the other issues of the day is to create animosities and alienate supporters of a cause which can achieve victory only through the assistance of all religious bodies and political parties.

When I read that, I couldn't help but wonder: What level of equality might women have achieved, what might we have accomplished, had we not been irreversibly divided by social issues like abortion? Would our stubborn pay gap have been bridged? Would our workplaces support parents and their families? Might we have put more women in office, more women in board rooms, who could then work together with men to solve our nation's most pressing problems? Would we have passed the Equal Rights Amendment?

So this is where I take my stand, on the side of bringing a greater gender balance to corporate board rooms and political offices, on the side of speaking out against sexism, on the side of promoting gender equity.

On the side of women.

Welcome to my coming out party.

In Betty Friedan's footsteps

2006-02-01T13:07:00.000-08:00

Men are not the enemy, but the fellow victims. The real enemy is women's denigration of themselves. -- Betty Friedan

Betty Friedan's death on February 4, her 85th birthday, opens a window for us to talk again about feminism and where it began and where it is today.

We don't do this enough, this looking back over our shoulders to watch time erase the very large footsteps we've followed all along.

A noted author, co-founder of the National Organization for Women and the National Abortion Rights Action League, Friedan had the same cachet as other early second wave feminists. Her seminal work, The Feminine Mystique, gave women who loved their homes and families permission to recognize it was also good to love themselves, to fill the creative void in their souls by exploring a world beyond the four walls of the kitchen and laundry room.

But it is not Friedan's feminism that appeals to me so much as her common sense, something today's niche feminism occasionally lacks.

So many women I've met will say they are feminists, yet hesitate to fully embrace it.

"Can't we find another word for it?" one woman asked.

From what I've read about her, Friedan understood this thought and saw how and where feminism veered off track. Not the whole movement, just the part of it that blamed and denigrated men, that wished them gone. The part that ridiculed women who chose children and family, whose lives were fulfilled by domestic pursuits.

Those who have been judged not feminist enough now look at feminism with a jaded eye and wonder if our progress is simply the natural evolution of an advancing society, rather than the outgrowth of a revolution launched by manifestos like Friedan's Feminine Mystique.

Consider, for a moment, that Friedan was president of NOW when the organization pressured President Lyndon Baines Johnson to sign an Executive Order barring sex discrimination by federal contractors. We accept today that it is wrong to deny employment or contracts or an equal wage or a mortgage to a woman just because she is a woman. We accept equal opportunity as a way of life, because Betty Friedan and women like her stood up on our behalf.

A powerful pro-choice advocate, Friedan argued against pegging abortion as the defining issue for feminism. In fact, she urged women to take feminism into the mainstream, embracing men and all women.

Even, perhaps, the kind of women today who wish for a different word to define their passion for equality under the law.

Late in life, Friedan took on issues of aging, leaving feminism to those of us who now stand in a world where our right to medical privacy is no longer as immediate an issue as our right to personal privacy, where we draw lines among ourselves, liberal and conservative, pro-life and pro-choice, work at home and work outside home.

Behind us, the footsteps of pioneering feminists have faded with time. But they are still large and still filled with promises we still must keep.

--Originally published February 2006

Are men necessary? Maureen O'Dowd's flamethrower

2005-11-01T12:54:00.000-08:00

Are men necessary?

What a glorious and an amazing question. It's a flamethrower igniting gnarled and near-dead roots, a molotov cocktail tossed with frightening accuracy at society's most critical flashpoint.

Columnist Marueen Dowd has drawn the criticism you'd expect with a book titled Are Men Necessary? When Sexes Collide. No topic of discussion has more fire in it than the Great Gender Divide. And no topic needs more discussion.

The way we relate as human beings, the way men and women perceive one another forms the foundation for virtually every facet of our society. It determines the roles mothers and fathers play in families, the way employees and employers relate in the workplace. It governs marriages and marries government with social conservatives who seek just enough political power to order our private lives.

From almost the moment of creation, the world has been about the way men and women interact. And we're all afraid to talk about it.

"What?" you exclaim. "All the women I know always talk about men!"

Well, yes. But that's not talking about gender. It's not looking at how young women are molding their generation with the kinds of traditional behaviors and expectations that drove their grandmothers to burn bras and march for the Equal Rights Amendment.

It's not a thoughtful examination of the roles men play in our lives and how our attitude towards gender affects relationships.

Some say Dowd has done no better. Witness the letter writer who responded to an excerpt from the book published last week in the New York Times with this gem:

"Will someone please marry Maureen Dowd?".

Please, when you read the book - and you must read the book - don't make the same mistake and miss the point. This collection of columns is Dowd's point of view, offered to show us a world outside our own trail of thought.

Love it or hate it, but talk about it. Let it stir your own thoughts and frustrations, let it drive your own passions closer to the surface.

This is our time; it is our challenge to secure a better future, more fairness, less discrimination. And these are the discussions we must have, now.

Burn, baby, burn.

--originally published in November, 2005

Breast Brigade moms demand the right to nurse

2005-08-28T13:15:00.000-07:00

Originally published August 28 2005

When my children were babies, I nursed them everywhere. Shopping malls, airports, airplanes, the car (passenger side only), city parks, you name it.

The simplicity appealed to me. When they were hungry, they ate. I wore clothing that allowed me to easily access my nursing bra, I carried a blanket to drape over my shoulder.

People probably guessed I had a breast exposed under there, but if they couldn't see it, frankly, I didn't care.

I feel a little funny writing the word "breast". A little embarrassed. Worried I'll be nabbed by the Internet porn police. I'm smart enough to know that's about centuries of social and cultural conditioning. Nursing itself is a beautiful and natural process, a gift when it comes easily and slow torture when it does not.

Friends who've bottle-fed for a whole host of reasons admit to feeling a measure of guilt. But it is infinitely better to have a comfortable, happy mother bottle-feeding her baby than a nervous and resentful mother fighting feelings of inadequacy.

Throughout history, women have relied on wet nurses and bottles, there's nothing wrong with choosing a reasonable option when it's available.

That's the point, really. Women today can choose the lives they want to live. Nursing should be a choice, freely made and supported by our culture.

Instead, we've got people like the folks in the Kent County government building who were offended by the sight of a woman breastfeeding. And not just any woman, a religious, conservative Quaker woman, who covered her head, but not enough of her lactating breast.

According to the Grand Rapids Press, Jennifer Seif was approached by County Clerk Mary Beth Hollinrake as she nursed her infant son, Micah, in April. Seif's cape dress, which is designed for nursing mothers, didn't hide enough of Micah's mealtime activity.

Call it a "wardrobe malfunction."

The county's taken a lot of heat; a group of "lactivists" (I don't make these things up) held a rally in Grand Rapids this past week calling attention to the incident and others like it. While government is a big and easy target, the truth is Hollinrake didn't do anything until people complained. And then she just did her job.

The people who complained represent the attitude we have to change. Our culture has so sexualized women's breasts, that some people can't see them as anything but sexual - when breasts have been the source of life-giving milk from the days after Adam and Eve were tossed out of the Garden.

Women who organized this week's rally say they're petitioning for a law to protect nursing mothers from public harassment. Two other laws already under consideration would exempt nursing mothers from jury duty and provide protection for nursing moms who need to express breast milk while at work.

Laws can create consequences for bad behavior. But they won't change people's minds or our cultural obsession with sexualizing everything from television commercials to 3rd grade dance recitals.

That part - the important part - is up to us.