Amy Sandberg: Turning the clock back on women
By Amy Sandberg
Several weeks ago Marissa Mayer was named CEO of Yahoo. Shortly after her appointment, Mayer announced she was pregnant, making her the first pregnant woman of a Fortune 500 company.
Amy Sandberg
Cause for celebration, right? Not so fast. Even though Yahoo showed what Mayer termed “evolved thinking” around news of her pregnancy, Mayer nevertheless felt compelled to reassure investors by issuing the following statement: “My maternity leave will be a few weeks long and I’ll work throughout it.”
Anyone who has ever had children, knows from experience that caring for a newborn is a full-time job. So either Mayer won’t “work through it,” or else she will be delegating childcare to someone else. I make no judgment either way, but why did she feel the need to deny the obvious?
Also, consider the brouhaha over two women in uniform photographed while breast feeding their babies. They were criticized for being “unprofessional” and bringing dishonor to the uniform. The official line of the National Guard and Air Force was that they were wrong to use the uniform to promote a cause, but who takes that statement seriously when the federal budget allocates $26.5 million per year to plaster National Guard logos on race cars?
A women working full-time who has a baby subjects herself to criticism for taking time off. However, if she doesn’t take time off and manages to care for her child the best she is able while working, she subjects herself to criticism for dishonoring her uniform, not to mention she will also be criticized for being a bad parent who has shortchanged the mother-child bonding process. Sounds like a lose-lose proposition.
Still not convinced that the clock has been turned back on women? Consider that some states require women to submit to medically unnecessary vaginal probe ultrasounds before they are allowed to get an abortion, a legally protected medical procedure. A woman’s access to family planning counseling, i.e. the ability to control when and with whom she gets pregnant, is also under siege with cutbacks in funding for Planned Parenthood and criticism of Obamacare contraceptive benefits.
Women still don’t earn the same pay as men for equal work — even after you factor in the leaves women take to do the trivial work of having children and raising families.
The latest assault on yours and my intelligence and the female gender comes from Representative Todd Akin, who suggested last weekend that in cases of “legitimate rape” a woman’s body has ways of keeping her from getting pregnant — therefore eliminating the need for legal abortions in instances of rape.
Add to all this, Donald Trump’s remark that “women just don’t get it,” and perhaps you can understand why it feels to me like we haven’t progressed all that much since Salem.
I would agree with the Anne Lamott, author of the brilliant “Operating Instructions”— one the best parenting memoirs ever — that aging white men have such terror and contempt for women’s bodies that they haven’t bothered to learn about them. However, if I said that I’d be accused of being a femi-Nazi, because, you know, feminism and Nazism go hand in hand.
Pay attention, women! Especially young women. Hear what is being said over your (pretty little) heads. And once you’ve heard it, be heard yourselves. Understand your rights. Exercise them. Vote. Speak out. And, most importantly, don’t let the opposite sex, the government, or the machine define womanhood — which is, in case you’d forgotten, the same as personhood.
Sandberg works in the book publishing industry. Reach her at sandberg8462@yahoo.com.
Related posts:
Short URL: http://www.pomeradonews.com/?p=27869
Posted by Staff
on Aug 23 2012. Filed under Columnists.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
Ultra conservatives view women, especially single women, as trouble that should be silenced. But you know what they say: Screw us and we multiply.
Inflammatory remarks serve to:
1. Provoke reaction, usually emotional
2. Solidify opposition
Cite your references, and debate accordingly, instead of tossing careless rhetoric about. You cannot expect to further the feminist point-of-view using "aging white men' without forever poisoning your argument with generalization (the root of prejudice, the mother of discrimination). The offenders you mention also are your neighbors, co-workers, fathers, inventors, leaders – the "aging white men" that have preserved the very Republic that provides your freedom of speech, movement, thought, body, and spirit.
Amy, there is no doubt that you are very intelligent and introspective. Therefore, I give you this scenario: All the wrongs as you see them are corrected – no more problems, according to your credo. Then what? What's next, Amy? Is all right with the world as you see it. These "aging white men" are, well, "remediated". No-one left to call-out. Would that make you feel better?
Lance, you and guest below do not read very carefully. 'Aging white man' was referring to an Anne Lamott quote and I was correct in assuming that if I use that kind of rhetoric (which I specifically avoided) I'd be shellacked. You as much called me as Nazi-feminist without calling me a Nazi feminist. And since you are so adept at logic, let me ask you this: since, as you point out, we can never achieve perfection, does that mean we should stop trying to improve society, however incrementally? Finally, please let me know what you would like referenced and I will provide you with those. It seems like you are a frequent reader so you should know by now that I research my topics thoroughly, even though you may disagree with the way I interpret the evidence.
Weasel journalism, Amy. End-run: you chose to cite Lamott and her book, and affirmed that controversial portion. Therefore, your article is tainted with overtones of, what you call, Nazi Feminism. The citation, as well as the tone of your article serve to point-out a percieved defect in the "aging white male". I suspect your displeasure was piqued by Akin, which evolved into an generalization therein. So be it.
I guess you're unwilling to answer my questions. Maybe you'll answer this one: Are you defending Todd Akin's comments based on the fact that he's an old male and can't be expected to learn new tricks?
Also, calling my writing 'weasel journalism' does not make it so–no matter how many times you repeat it. It does, however, make you a person who uses ad hominem attacks in a vain attempt to disprove points of view you find objectionable.
Amy, why would you cite Anne Lamott if something in her writing didn't resonate with you (in other words, you agree with her or her opinion). YOU never answered Lance's original question…. if all was right with the world by your view, would you feel better?
Just out of curiosity Amy, when you roll over in the morning what are you looking at? My guess is an aging white man.
Yes a beautiful, naked, liberal, enlightened aging white man. He would probably agree with ANNE LAMOTT that women do strike terror (if not contempt) in the hearts of men. As a sex, we're pretty complex and powerful in case you hadn't noticed
.
My father is aging an aging white man. And much to his credit (and I suspect a to my credit as well) his views on women have evolved over the years. Such is not the case with much (not all) conservative males. They've not evolved. In fact, from what I can tell they are devolving. As Joe Scarborough (a Republican aging white male) said last week, the GOP is becoming the "stupid party". Based on some of the comments coming out of the likes of Todd Akin and Rep. King here in CA, I couldn't agree more with Mr. Scarborough.
What does your definition of "enlightened" or "evolved" mean, Amy? Docile? Wimp? Spineless?
I watch the women here in southern California treat their men like sperm donors whose base needs have to be tolerated in order for them to acquire the children society says they should have. The guys are treated with contempt and sex is used as a weapon in an unending battle for the upper hand in the relationship. TV is filled with examples of the wise women who must tolerate the stupid man (Monica and Chandler from Friends, the couple on the King of Queens, and even reality TV like JWoww and Snookie to name a few). Whole generations of women have been taught it’s OK to treat men with disrespect… for what reason? Payback for the wrongs their mothers and grandmothers received before the Feminist movement? (refer to next post)
Amy- Personally I think you are right on the money. I wonder why so many people are so afraid of what you are saying. I am married to an aging white man, and thankfully he his more enlightened than some of the people on this post, as well as many in the Republican party. Especially when it does to women's issues. Thank you for your courage in writing this. I, for one, know you to be a sensitive, kind, intelligent, woman. Enough said for now.
Dr. Lorri Green, you make a great cheer leader, but bring little to the table except a disparaging comment about a Republican party that includes many women.
Are you really just a wind up Democratic doll?
Yes, yes she is. I think they made Amy write this article so Dick wouldn't take all the heat this week.
Tom and Okiefied- A couple of things. No, I am not a cheer leader for Amy. I watch the news, read the NY Times, Wash. Post and the LA Times. Yes, there are some Republican women. When I think of them I think Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, and others of her ilk, who are not the brightest women I have ever heard. So let me see if I can add something to the table, Tom. For one thing you could learn to spell my name. Secondly, and more importantly, listen to the idiotic comment made by Sen. Akin about woe's bodies being able to not get pregnant if it was a legitimate" rape. That should be enough right there. And, he quotes an M.D. who is a religious fanatic and disrespected by the AMA. In fact, he didn't actually quote him but mis-stated what he had said. And then there is the issue of abortion. I am a woman who lived before Roe v Wade and lost a good friend to a "back alley abortion". She started to bleed out and we took her to the E.R. where the male docs took their time getting to her, because they now what she had done. She Died. This was in Fullerton, Calif. in 1967. I would and could go on, but something tells me both of your minds are closed and you are probably both white men.,
I have to agree with you Tom. Good call..
Lorri – I'm a woman and you're a fanatic in the same ilk as Nancy Pelosi and we could point fingers and call each other names all day. I think left wing liberal women are by and large well meaning but dumb. I personally like Tammy Bruce.
I enjoy most of Amy's columns. I was giving her a ribbing because the aging white guy who writes the other column is getting spanked hard for his position. You need to relax.
Nice, 100% agree. The Dr. needs to prescribe herself a chill pill.
(continued from previous post)
The clock was never moved forward for women. Feminism gave women the illusion that we can have it all but the truth is, we can’t. At least not for any length of time because although we are strong our endurance can last only so long before the career falters, our marriage is on the rocks, or our children are acting out because of a lack of boundaries from absentee parenting. Our only power then is to choose what has to give.
Like you, I wake up next to a man I adore. He is an aging white male who has conservative political beliefs AND he is intelligent, open-minded, respectful, charming, chivalrous, and considerate. I appreciate that he has the strength and willingness to call me on my stuff because I can be quite difficult to deal with. The difference between him and many of the enlightened men you speak of is he is still a man. 100 percent! In mind, body, and spirit.
Fundamentalist expression, whether right or left leaning, serves no purpose but to divide an already contentious nation. What happened to trying to find common ground with Lowell rather than be so divisive?
Docile? Wimp? Spineless? Are those your synonyms for a man who treats women as an equal partner? They're not mine. I've seen some of the behavior you attribute to So. Cal. women, but you paint your picture with too broad of a brush. Not all women are enlightened just as not all men are. We're all works in progress.
I don't know how you define "having it all". I think it's difficult to have a career , and a marriage and children to raise at the same time–for men an women. More difficult for women, generally speaking, b/c we're often expected to work more of the second shift. I do think it's possible to have all these things (if you want them) but just not at the same time.
I'm not sure what is fundamentalist about my column?? I'm supportive of the rights of all people–men and women. This column happens to be about women. Who knows, perhaps I'll give men equal time in a future column? I'm not going to get into a debate about whether my man is more 'manly' then your man, but let's just say he's a 6'5" former Olympian with a Ph.D. and a kind heart who loves poetry, music, and nature. That may not be your definition of all man, but it is mine.