Motherhood
The "A-Word"
Published October 18, 2009 @ 03:51PM PT
Recently, I spoke at Perinatal: A Symposium on Birth Practices and Reproductive Rights at George Mason University. The task for the featured round table panelists was to determine legal and political strategies to advance reproductive rights in childbirth. My contribution included noting that childbirth rights advocates need to involve our work into the more mainstream causes of human rights and reproductive rights, including abortion rights.
The audience, fellow childbirth advocates, ignored my comments on abortion. Apparently, the "a-word" is not acceptance language among childbirth reformers. I discussed the abortion debate from a mother's perspective in a prior post, and understand that women who devote their lives to improving birth outcomes and lowering infant mortality rates are invested in the life of the fetus. However, my comments never took a side on the abortion debate. I merely observed an unfortunate consequence on childbirth rights from this debate.
I observed that one unexpected effect of the abortion debate was to give more importance to the choices and beliefs of third parties regarding the medical care of pregnant and laboring women than to the choices of the women themselves. Doctors and hospitals have relied upon Roe v. Wade and subsequent law to impose medical treatment on pregnant women in utter disregard of their legal rights to informed consent and informed refusal. Pregnant women's rights are ignored while the fetus receives legal representation after the 26-week gestation period. The justification has consistently been that the government's interest in the life of the fetus found in Roe overrides a woman's decision in her own healthcare and medical treatments.
What Do You Want to Know About Financial Regulatory Reform?
Published October 13, 2009 @ 09:06PM PT
That is the question being asked by the White House to moms these days.
In a seemingly sudden realization that women, particularly moms, have an interest in the financial future of this country, the White House put out a call for moms to express their concerns and questions about financial regulatory reform.
Despite the idea that men are often thought of as the "bread winners" in the family setting, moms are often in charge of their own finances, careers as well as household budget, their children's education, personal loan payments and home mortgages (among other things). Therefore, it seems fitting that the White House made this special effort to solicit their advice. The question was not only posted on it's blog this week, but also on The Motherhood where dozens of women left finance oriented questions.
I love to see national policy makers focusing their outreach to women - particularly moms, since 82.5 million women in the United States are mothers. It is nice to see that women are also taking a stake in their financial future by asking the questions that need to be asked before another economic crisis hits.
Make sure to see what moms asked over at The Motherhood and then follow up on the answers over on the White House Blog later this week.
Photo credit: kevindooley
Friday Femme Fatale: HIV Vaccine, Maternity Care & Anti-Choice Hit List
Published September 25, 2009 @ 03:41PM PT
Phew! How is it already Friday? This week just flew by. That must be because of all the amazing things going on lately. For example, NARAL had an event bringing together young professionals and helping them get involved pro-choice movement. Check out photos of those who attended (including yours truly) and if you haven't become a member of NARAL yet, you can do so here.
Also, my full-time employer, Air America Media, had a fun party this week as we get ready for our new website to launch in just a few days. You can see photos of that event here.
Next up, the latest and greatest articles in women's rights from the past seven days. Enjoy.
- Kyl: 'I Don't Need Maternity Care.' Stabenow: 'Your Mom Probably Did' (Talking Points Memo)
- Dylan Ratigan's Women's Moment (Gloria Feldt)
- Anti-choice 'Electoral Hit List' Targets Twelve Democrats (RH Reality Check)
- Bloody Hell-Healthcare Reform Will Not Increase The Tax On Condoms and Tampons (Feminist Peace Network)
- The Mother of Reinvention (New York Times)
- The Crusade Against Sex Trafficking (The Nation)
Friday Femme Fatale: Lactation, Adoption & Darwinism
Published August 28, 2009 @ 03:54PM PT
Well summer is almost over and you can nearly hear the echo in the media chambers of how sloooow the news cycle has been lately - but never fear, Friday Femme Fatale is always here.
Here are some of the interesting articles of the week, enjoy:
- Six Questions on Men and Feminism for Author Shira Tarrant (Bitch Magazine)
- When Words Kill: A Health Care Glossary (Religion Dispatches)
- Love in the Time of Darwinism (City Journal)
- Warning: Unauthorized lactation can get you fired, moms. (Buckeye State Blog)
- Shotgun Adoption (The Nation)
- Houston Officials Bust Teen Sex Ring (My Fox)
- Mali women's rights bill blocked (BBC News)
- New mom's firing upheld (The Columbus Dispatch)
Are Pregnant Women Losing Their Rights?
Published July 30, 2009 @ 11:49AM PT
Check out this piece by Louise Marie Roth on Huffington Post about a recent court case titled: New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services v. V.M. and B.G, in which a mid-level court of appeals in New Jersey avoided deciding on the question of whether or not a pregnant woman's decisions during labor and childbirth may be the basis for a finding, under state civil child welfare laws, of abuse and neglect.
According to the National Advocates for Pregnant Women, "the decision is a victory of sorts, it nevertheless reveals how extraordinarily unsettled and contested pregnant women's rights are" and Roth points out just how dangerous it is to try to make court rulings against the rights of pregnant women:
The court's opinion also suggests that lawmakers have no concept of what it is like to be in labor. Women in labor tend to find themselves on a different mental plane, where they have to focus inward and work with their bodies to give birth. As midwives know, some women become belligerent. Some seek privacy and seclusion. Most women in labor are likely to find the routine and usually unnecessary procedures of hospitals to be invasive and unwelcome. Yet the courts that decided this case didn't seem to be aware that women are unlikely to behave the same way when they are in labor as when they aren't. The decision cites hospital records that describe the mother, V.M., as "combative," "uncooperative," "erratic," "noncompliant," "irrational" and "inappropriate." Also, her husband indicated that the way she was acting was not her "normal manner and that she is not as 'tranquil.'" Why would anyone expect a woman in labor to be compliant, tranquil, or rational? What kinds of expectations does our society have for women undergoing a powerful physiological process, often with an absurd amount of poking, prodding and general interference? This mother was uncooperative with hospital staff, but clearly her uncooperativeness had nothing to do with the well-being of her baby.
Yikes. Once again, I ask - what will it take to truly trust women?
You can view a pdf of the decision here.
Competition Cleared for Gillibrand in NY Senate Seat Race
Published June 29, 2009 @ 09:14PM PT
Is it true? Is President Obama clearing the field for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand so she can win the Senate seat in New York fair and square? First ACORN, now NARAL endorses her run. From Ben Smith at Politico:
Gillibrand picks up NARAL endorsement
A significant get ahead of a potential primary and a blow to Rep. Carolyn Maloney, who is looking to run to Gillibrand's left:
Washington, DC — Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, announced that her organization’s political action committee proudly endorses Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand in the special primary election slated for September 2010.
Finding the Feminism In Motherhood
Published May 24, 2009 @ 07:58AM PT
When we talk about women, we are often talking about mothers since 53.5% of women are mothers, they are on average around age 40 and 80% of women have children.
The discussion ranges from how influential they are in the market (very) - women comprise over 50% of the population, make over 80% of household purchasing decisions, and are expected to control 60% of all wealth by 2010 - to how influential they are in society (inadequate). Women CEOs equal a mere 15.7% in 2008 despite earning six out of 10 college degrees and making up 59% of the workforce.
But, what is a mom blogger? Is she a mother who blogs about any topic, or a mother who blogs mainly about parenting topics? Elisa Camahort Page, co-founder and COO of BlogHer, asked this question when I queried her about specific results of The 2009 Women and Social Media Study by BlogHer, iVillage and Compass Partners. I responded that I believed "mom blogger" describes a blogger who self-identifies as a mother mainly writing about parenting.
That distinction makes a big difference. How we define and think of mom bloggers and moms who blog might explain the perceived gap between mom bloggers and feminists, for example, and it might even explain the perception of moms who blog, whether about parenting or any topic.
Here's what the The 2009 Women and Social Media Study by BlogHer, iVillage and Compass Partners found (see methodology here):
Education level:
- 77% some college and beyond
- High school graduate or less: 16.8%
- Technical or trade school: 9.3%
- Some college/university: 39.1%
- Graduated from college/university: 25.5%
- Some post-graduate work: 3.1%
- Masters or Doctorate degree: 6.2%
Employment: 34% are solely SAHM:
- Employed full-time: 32.3%
- Employed part-time: 12.4%
- Managing my own business: 8.1%
- Managing my household: 34.2%
- Retired: 3.1%
- Student: 9.9%
Income level:
- Under $25K: 15.5%
- $25K-$34,999: 19.3%
- $35K-$49,999: 19.3%
- $50K-$74,999: 24.2%
- $75K-$99,999: 8.7%
- $100K-$124,999: 7.5%
- Greater than $125K: 5.6%
** General Population respondents who are both moms and who blog (any subject)
** Sample size=161
In short, moms who blog are well-educated, most are middle class, and only about a third are solely stay at home - middle of the bell curve for the population. In other words, it is the broadest and most diverse group.
So why are there so many homogenizing assumptions about the group?
I theorize it's the word mom. We hear that word and instantly think of our negative and reductive media induced stereotype of a woman who is raising children and our own personal prejudice. With this combination, it's hard to perceive moms beyond their parenting role and as a respect-worthy "professional."
As a result, anything prefaced with "mom" isn't likely to garner necessary support. Nevertheless, the feminist movement continues to frame issues that are, truly, "all of us issues" as "mom" or "women's" issues. Necessary ownership has migrated to marginalization. Consider fair pay. While framed as a women's issue, this has achieved a high-degree of opposition. However, when women are not receiving equal pay for equal work - regardless of why - it hurts these women personally, but it also harms society at large. Single mothers are three times more likely than men to be single income earners and they also overwhelm the lower earning quintiles, making them the largest at-risk group for public assistance (especially mothers).
It shouldn't need to be said, but clearly it must be: when women are harmed, we're all harmed.
Unfortunately, the women's movement hasn't succeeded in convincing enough men and women that these issues do affect us all and are essential to reform. Further, although many women do frequently work to improve conditions for women and children - whether as volunteers in Planned Parenthood clinics, on the PTA to improve education, or anywhere else - many are reluctant to identify themselves as feminist. We've been conditioned - by both sides - to see many roles as mutually exclusive from feminism.
It's clear that feminism has a PR problem. It's clear that women have a PR problem.
And that might very well be the actual gap.
The old maxims of "strength in numbers" and "divide and conquer" are definitely applicable here. Feminism needs to broaden its concept to acknowledge and value all contributions by all individuals who are working to improve the status of women, even if those efforts don't come under the auspice of the feminist flag. Women, especially mothers, need to appreciate that feminism is effort designed to improve quality of life for everyone by advancing the status of women.
I'd love to see more equitable representation of women in power positions, better media coverage of women and their efforts, a complete drop of the "Madonna" or "whore" black and white coverage of mothers in the media, and a better perception of the word mom and feminist.
Maybe then we can better see and appreciate that so many of us are working towards the same goals. Admittedly, right now, we're doing more parallel play versus interactive play, but that doesn't mean a total disconnect. There is a great deal of cross-over - it simply needs better publicity.
To that end, the MOMocrats and Fem 2.0 are joining to host a live chat: Fem2.0 Twittercast: Feminism is Where You Are/What You Do.
MOMocrat Cynematic wrote, "No matter where we are in our respective life cycles...if you're a feminist, you've probably brought that sensibility with you to your activism...Let's move off labels, identities, and the preconceptions that can come attached to those. Let's find as many different feminisms as we can through the kinds of way it's practiced."
We hope you'll join in.
