Women's Issues

 With all the talk of how close the Presidential race has become, the news pundits have been dissecting the race by micro-examining each sub-group of the electorate. One of the groups getting a lot of attention over the last months and most particularly over the last weeks has been women. The conventional wisdom is that President Obama is stronger on “women’s issues”. That really got me thinking about what makes an issue- a “woman’s issue”. After much thought I concluded that dividing issues by gender is a very subtle way of continuing to discriminate against women.

I started thinking of the kinds of issues that have been assigned to women. One of the ways we can see which issues have been designated as a woman’s issues is to look at the issues that have occupied our First Ladies. I think it goes without saying that if one of our First Ladies had actually been President; these issues would have been far from the national front burner. But, as you know, we have never had a woman President. (Though I’m absolutely convinced that Hillary Clinton would have been President if she could have beaten Barrack Obama in the primaries- there is no way the country was going to elect a Republican after the Bush fiasco) Since that didn’t happen, let’s get back to the “women’s issues”. Almost every First Lady has had a pet project and many have been worthy matters needing our concern, but none of them important enough to be dealt with from the Oval Office. Dolly Madison led an effort to care for female orphans. Jackie Kennedy’s passion was refurbishing the White House. Pat Nixon promoted volunteerism for women. Barbara Bush was active in promoting literacy, and Laura Bush promoted education. Lady Bird Johnson spearheaded an effort for national beatification. Let’s not forget Nancy Reagan’s youth drug abuse campaign. Betty Ford worked to provide more mental health care, and Michelle Obama’s campaign is to address childhood obesity. That’s just a few, but nearly every First lady had her issue or project.

Looking back at these issues, a pattern begins to emerge. These issues fall into categories that fit well with female stereotypes. We see care for children, education, hearth and home- beautification, and women’s volunteerism. In essence these causes have almost exclusively been about kids, schools, houses, pets, and giving the “ladies” something to do.  I’m not saying that many causes championed by First Ladies were not worthy causes, I’m merely saying these causes tend to fit a stereotype that can be seen as “lesser” causes. The only time a First Lady actually tried to move the country on a serious and important issue was the work Hillary Clinton t did to create a national health care system. President Clinton asked his wife to lead this effort and I think we all remember the result. Hillary Clinton was mistreated by the Congress (even members of the President’s Party) and the public, and was roundly criticized on every front. My memory was that the criticism went well beyond the issue itself, and it became a scathing personal attack about her “place” and even her femininity. Mrs. Clinton never again enjoyed the kind of positive public regard afforded to most First Ladies. Of course she went on to become very successful on her own as a Senator and Secretary of State. But in her role alongside a man, she was severely constrained by her gender.

We never designate certain issues as "Men’s Issues". Our culture has simply assigned the big issues to men by default. In matters of war, politics, high finance and industry, and governance our first image is never that of a woman at the seat of power. There are notable exceptions, but they remain exceptions. I challenge you to research how many women are CEO’s of the Fortune 500 companies. You’ll see a few, but only a very few. Look at our Congress and you will see a shockingly low percentage of women. Our current Senate has only 17% women, while our House of Representatives has 18% women. Women are one half of the country and less than 1/5^th of the body that governs it. Perhaps we just like our women to stick to those lesser issues.

If we look to the “Women’s Issues” at play in this election an even more disturbing pattern emerges. Our institutional discrimination against women has now turned its full force onto the glaring aspect of gender. The political debate is now focused on women’s sexuality and reproduction. When we allow these issues to be placed in the category of “women’s issue”, we are unwittingly engaging in a just another form of discrimination against women.  Sexuality and reproduction by their nature involve both genders. But we have allowed our politics to place all the responsibility, all the stigma, and all the guilt on women. Unfortunately it is women who normally bear the consequences, and have to face the judgments of others. But, I argue that this part of our culture is just wrong and needs change.

Listening to the political debate, you hear the arguments about who gets to decide what kind of medical coverage  women have available to them, including contraception (woman’s issue)- personhood amendments (woman’s issue)- who can get funding for reproductive health care (woman’s issue)- what defines rape as opposed to "forcible rape" (woman’s issue)- and even if fair and equal pay should be protected (woman’s issue). As you think about these issues remember that over 80% of those who will decide the outcome are not women. To even consider these issues is to place women alone, in the position to be judged about their sexuality, morals, and their characters. (Remember the Limbaugh “slut” remark) This is a fundamental issue of human rights. And even as all the male captains of industry and leaders of government smugly decide the fate of women’s bodies and their very status as citizens, very few males have stood to defend women against this degrading categorization or offer to fully share the burden now placed on women.

Women’s issues are men’s issues too. Fair and equal pay should be a matter of economic justice for men just as it is for women. Women are in men’s lives- we can’t separate the welfare of one gender without effecting the welfare of the other. Fundamental issues concerning women’s’ reproductive choice and health should be as important to the fathers, sons and husbands as it is to the women in their lives. To allow the politicians to create a false distinction about what is important to women does a disservice to both genders. It is that kind of thinking that has held women to a lower status throughout time. I hope we can evolve someday to a position of true gender equality. It starts with recognizing that “women’s issues” are human issues and it takes acceptance of that fact, and reason to stop the cruel stigmatizing that happens now. Wouldn’t it be a different world if every time some congressman (and those doing it now are all men) decides to introduce a law that, in any way, effects a woman’s body, sexuality or reproduction, there has to be an accompanying law that effects a man’s body, sexuality or reproduction with equal force? I think we would see the end of this kind of discrimination very quickly.

The political war on women is not new. Men throughout history have controlled women by regulating their reproductive lives and sexuality.  Over the last two years legislative attacks of this nature have gained  momentum in our State Houses and in the Congress. To stop this most fundamental form of hatred and disdain for women we must call upon our best instincts and our best behavior to make it stop. One way to start down that path is begin the realization the issues we call “women’s issues” are equally important to men. That makes them fundamental human issues and we all have a responsibility to protect them-both men and women. Relegating these issues to the category of “women’s Issues” only perpetuates the problem, and lets half of us off the hook.

Thanks for looking in.