Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘women in government’ Category

They could not drive themselves to the polls, and the women who were running were not allowed to campaign by speaking directly to men, yet voting and running in their first election ever, Saudi women scored wins.  Women candidates circumvented strict rules preventing all-in campaign rallies by tapping social media to get their platforms noticed.  Women voters, not permitted to drive, took advantage of Uber to get to the polls.

As Sir Paul says, it’s getting better.

 

Middle East

In Milestone, Saudis Elect First Women to Councils

By BEN HUBBARD DEC. 13, 2015

Saudi women cast their votes at a polling station in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in municipal elections on Saturday. Credit Ahmed Yosri/European Pressphoto Agency

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — In elections that allowed Saudi women to vote and run for office for the first time, more than a dozen women won seats on local councils in different parts of the country, officials said on Sunday.While the move was hailed by some as a new step into the public sphere by women in this religious and conservative monarchy, the local councils have limited powers and the new female members will make up less than 1 percent of the elected council members nationwide.

The participation of women in the vote was a milestone in a very gradual social shift for a country that deprives women of many basic rights, barring them from driving and from making many important decisions without the approval of a male relative.

Read more >>>>

At least 20 Saudi women emerged victorious in Saturday’s historic local elections in which females in this religiously conservative kingdom were allowed to cast votes and run for office for the first time.

With seats on 284 municipal councils up for grabs and about 1,000 women and 7,000 men competing, females won only a small fraction of the races, according to early results. Still, local and international rights activists praised the tally as a victory for women in a fundamentalist Muslim country where they face many restrictions.

Voter turnout among women was exceptionally high.

Nearly 81% of 130,000 female registered voters cast ballots, said General Election Commission spokesman Hamad Al-Omar.

Read more >>>>

First Female Politicians Elected In Saudi Arabia

Women candidates won in both big cities and small villages.

12/13/2015 10:04 am ET |

FAYEZ NURELDINE/AFP/Getty Images

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (AP) — Saudi voters elected 20 women for local government seats, according to results released to The Associated Press on Sunday, a day after women voted and ran in elections for the first time in the country’s history.

The women who won hail from vastly different parts of the country, ranging from Saudi Arabia’s largest city to a small village near Islam’s holiest site.

The 20 female candidates represent just one percent of the roughly 2,100 municipal council seats up for grabs, but even limited gains are seen as a step forward for women who had previously been completely shut out of elections. Women are still not allowed to drive and are governed by guardianship laws that give men final say over aspects of their lives like marriage, travel and higher education.

 

AMER HILABI/AFP/Getty Images
Lama Suleiman, pictured with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in 2010, won a seat in Saudi Arabia’s second largest city.

Though there are no quotas for female council members, an additional 1,050 seats are appointed with approval by the king who could use his powers to ensure more women are represented.

Read more >>>>

Women’s Suffrage

When and Where >>>>

Read Full Post »

Condoleeza Rice requires no introduction from me.  Her resumé accompanies her name.  When I read, last week, that Rutgers faculty voted to disinvite her from speaking at commencement where she is to be bestowed a doctor of laws degree, my first reaction was rather liberal arts.   All sides deserve a hearing.   Why silence this one?

On further reflection, and upon reading reports about this faculty vote, I wondered how,  if  Condi is so “heavily political”,  any politician could ever be invited to speak at any Rutgers event again without the double-standard card coming up.

French professor François Cornilliat criticized Rice’s selection as “heavily political”, asserting that “our students are being manipulated to deliver a political point.”

Mon Dieu!  This sounded  like 1950-something!  As if Alger Hiss had been invited.  (But, then, French departments have a habit of being behind the times.)

What is a liberal arts education if it forbids light to be shed on one side of the spectrum?  Either side?  And how, given this dictum and precedent,  does Rutgers ever host or bestow honors on any politician again?

No stranger to campus politics,  I concluded that the faculty had shot itself in the foot.  Good luck ever getting Hillary Clinton,  I thought.   Y’all just slammed that door closed – and locked it!

Seems I am not the only one who saw this implication.

Memo to Rutgers: Don’t Boycott Condi Now If You Won’t Boycott Hillary Later

When it comes to Iraq, don’t selectively throw shade.

Posted: March 8 2014 1:08 PM

56623627-united-states-to-go-with-afp-story-files-portrait-at

Condoleezza Rice; Hillary Clinton
FILES/AFP/Getty Images; FILES/AFP/Getty Images

Put me down as a skeptic when it comes to Condoleezza Rice.

Although she’s generally applauded for her barrier-breaking career in public service, as the first African-American woman to serve as secretary of state and national security adviser, “her signature ‘achievement’ in public life,” as I wrote a couple of years ago, “was co-signing Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq—one of the worst foreign policy blunders in American history.”

It’s not exactly a great resume item, and it’s probably why she’s faded from view.

And while I wouldn’t put it quite the way they did, I also can’t really argue with the criticism offered earlier this week by the Rutgers University faculty council, who said Rice “played a prominent role in [the Bush] administration’s effort to mislead the American people about the presence of weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq.

It’s why they’re urging their administration to replace Rice, who’s keynoting this year’s Rutgers commencement ceremony—which is their prerogative—and they’ve got every right to feel strongly about the issue. A lot of folks probably agree with them.

Rice, of course, maintains that she made the best judgment she could at the time, acknowledging in retrospect that she and her colleagues “could have done better.”

But whether or not the Rutgers faculty accepts Rice’s version of events, if they’re prepared to snub her at this point, then down the road they might also want to prepare to snub Hillary Clinton, because she, too, co-signed the invasion of Iraq.

Read more >>>>

At the time she cast that vote I agreed with her thinking – believing that it was right to accord those powers as she defined them.  I still stand by her words on that vote at that time.  I have never had a problem with that vote as it stood then.

If Condoleeza Rice is too heavily political and thereby should be banned from campus events, who is not?  Who can speak at Rutgers now?  Anyone?  Anyone?  Bueller?

I have another question about all of this. If the chosen speaker had been  Colin Powell, would the opposition have been as formidable?  Or would the boys club in the faculty lounge just have given him the pass?

Danke shön!  Thank you, Rutgers,  for shedding light on the state of faculty mentality.

Read Full Post »

They call Margaret Thatcher the “Iron Lady,” but did you know there was a Labour Party lady who, as Secretary of State for Employment under Harold Wilson,  mid-wifed equal pay legislation in the United Kingdom?

Her name was Barbara Castle, and she was a force to be reckoned with.  A Baroness raised as a socialist, she was fiery and firmly on the side of the working class.  Barbara was as steely as they come.

In 1968, the machinists in the U.K. Ford factory at Dagenham went on strike. All were women.  All worked at sewing machines making seat covers.  All were paid much less than men at the factory because their jobs were listed as unskilled.  The strike closed down production of Ford Escorts because no seats were available to install.

The women worked at the Dagenham factory in terrible conditions.  In the heat, they shed their clothes and worked in their underwear.  They considered it normal.  The roof leaked so badly that they rigged umbrellas over their stations to shield them and their sewing machines from the rain.   Paid 15% less than men, they struck  on June 7, 1968.

Union officials from Michigan contended that corporations would never survive if they paid women equally to men.  Honchos from Ford tried to pressure Castle saying they would move their operations if she did not cooperate.  Instead, she met with the striking women, managed a compromise for the moment (pay at 92% of what men received), and finally got an equal pay act in 1970.

We are not there yet in this country although industrialized nations followed the U.K. lead more than 40 years ago.  Amazing!

Equal pay for equal work! Why are we so far behind?

There is a movie about this that I just watched.  I strongly recommend you find a way to see it.  I saw it on Starz.

Made in Dagenham

Brava, Barbara and the lady machinists of Dagenham!   Real-life s/heroes!

Bonus:  There is a bit about bullying in this movie.  By teachers.  It has been known to happen.

Read Full Post »

Huma Abedin is Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff, a post she has risen to after long years on Hillary’s staff having started as an intern when Hillary was FLOTUS.  She is of Indian-Pakistani descent, but is an American (born here) with a pretty high security clearance.  She is a Muslim-American married to a Jewish-American, former Congressman Anthony Weiner, and the mother of an adorable six-month-old boy, Jordan.  She and Anthony recently gave a joint interview to People Magazine.

THE VILLAINS

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, former presidential candidate, has bizarrely and persistently claimed that Huma has ties to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, the party from which newly inaugurated Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi resigned after being declared the winner of the election, and therefore is a mole within the State Department with access to America’s top diplomat.

An amusing take on her accusations was posted in WaPo today.

Posted at 08:56 AM ET, 07/19/2012

Michele Bachmann vs. Huma Abedin: ‘The Ramadan Conspiracy’

By Arsalan Iftikhar

In the warped universe where this American currently resides, there remains only one heroic person brave enough to save our beloved United States from secretly being taken over by a falafel-eating, Mecca-praying and Ramadan-fasting cabal of sinister Muslims duplicitously bent upon imposing Islamic sharia law upon our golden shores.

Nope, the hero of this story is not Jason Bourne. Her name is actually Michele Bachmann.

Read more >>> (You will laugh, I promise.)

Not surprisingly, that paragon of truth in investigative bloviating, Glenn Beck (I shall spare you from looking at his picture.  You know what he looks like), has supported Bachmann’s McCarthyesque campaign against the woman who, last summer, also via People Magazine,  leaked, to everyone’s delight, the contents of Hillary Clinton’s bag: mesh zipper bags, hand sanitizer, Evian mineral water spray for her face because of the dry air on the plane where she lives.   (Yes I did go running to Harmon’s and bought some.  I had to ask for it,  and the clerk turned to another clerk and asked why this stuff was going like hotcakes.  Heh-heh – because Hillary Clinton – who has beautiful skin – uses it!  Huma said so!)

So now here’s Huma – defenseless.  Even her husband can’t really do anything for her, disgraced as he has been and the subject of his own rumors this week of resuming his mayoral run in NYC.  AND THEN A HERO COMES ALONG!

THE HEROES

First, a real hero, the war kind, from Bachmann’s own party.

John McCain defends Huma Abedin against Michele Bachmann

By Phoebe Connelly, Yahoo! News | The Ticket – Wed, Jul 18, 2012

Talk to the hand. (Justin Sullivan/Getty)

John McCain took to the Senate floor today to discuss Huma Abedin—known variously for her work at the State Department under Hillary Clinton and for her marriage to sexting ex-congressman Anthony Weiner. Is McCain perhaps a People magazine subscriber, using his time in the chamber to congratulate Abedin on the charming family photo unveiled by the mag today?

Alas, no. McCain was defending Abedin against recent accusations made by Rep. Michele Bachmann that Abedin’s security clearance should be questioned due to alleged ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. “I understand how painful and injurious it is when a person’s character, reputation, and patriotism are attacked without concern for fact or fairness,” McCain said according to prepared remarks. “It is for that reason that I rise today to speak in defense of Huma Abedin.”

Read more >>>

McCain’s condemnation of Bachmann’s remarks was quickly echoed by fellow Republican heavy-hitters, Speaker John Boehner (honorably discharged because of a bad back after enlisting in the Navy during the Vietnam War),  Senator ( and decorated Air Force veteran) Lindsey Graham,  and the cherry on the castigate-Bachmann cake, her former campaign manager Ed Rollins whose remarks indicate that she struggles when attempting to deal with facts.  From the other side of the aisle,  Democratic Congressman Keith Ellison, also a Muslim-American, spoke out.

DeHoS accords all of these heroes Gold Medals of Decency You guys rock! 

Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.

To all of our Muslim Homegirls and boys, we wish you a Happy Ramadan!

Read Full Post »

Perhaps Adam and Stacy closed down Texts to Hillary a  day too soon.  While many would agree that, indeed, they closed it at its absolutely unforeseeable pinnacle, events over the past two days resulted in a situation that simply cries out for one of their meme texts.

Unless you live under a rock, you know that for many weeks Republicans in a variety of positions: Congress,  presidential campaigns, state governments, have waged a brutal war on women, specifically our right to have access to and make decisions about our own health care.  One presidential candidate has maintained that according to his wife, who regularly meets with women on the campaign trail, the economy is of concern to women and birth control … not so much.

This position ignores the elephant in the room that women’s health care is in the context of the economy, but let’s not worry about that little wrinkle.  Mitt Romney believes that this is not an issue because his wife,  Ann,  has told him so.

Yesterday, CNN consultant  Hilary Rosen  remarked on the air  that Ann Romney had never worked a day in her life igniting the age-old (it seems) battle between working moms and stay-at-home moms.  So now we have a war within a war.  Now we have a war among women – again.

The meme I was thinking of had Ann texting HRC for advice on how to answer the other Hilary based on this National Journal article.

Ann Romney Tweets; What Would Hillary Do?

April 12, 2012 | 8:59 AM

You’ve come a long way, baby? Somehow the 2012 campaign has regressed  back to 1992 (some would say even decades earlier) when Hillary Clinton kicked up a storm for saying “I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life.”

The perceived knock on homemakers by the Yale-trained lawyer who went on to become First Lady came to mind when Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen scoffed on CNN Wednesday that the wife of presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney “has never actually worked a day in her life.” It was an insulting comment that revealed a lesson still unlearned from 1992. Work is work, whether it’s a paid office job or unpaid and generally thankless child-rearing. In a move clearly aimed at ginning up outrage among stay-at-home moms, Ann Romney joined Twitter to shoot back: “I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work.”

Reinhard makes excellent points.  In the course of the war on women, many have cited our preponderance in the population and pointed out that this majority is under the control of the minority faction, that this 52% of the populace should pull together and grab the controls.  Why should we not have a larger voice?   Well, my sisters, that is never going to happen while there is division in the ranks.  She may not have meant to, but Hilary Rosen opened an old wound.  She has countered that her remark was not about Ann Romney but about single, working moms.

So, on second thought, perhaps it is fortunate that the meme site closed.   The last thing we need is gasoline poured on this fire.  Women need to get past this false division and focus on what unites us and is in our best interests.   We will never prevail and have control over our own destinies if we do not.

Read Full Post »

As a little girl, I liked to play with caterpillars.  I did so very gently because they were so delicate, pretty, and harmless.  Caterpillars neither bite nor sting.  Sometimes I would put one in a jar with leaves and branches and airholes in the lid hoping, eventually, to have my own butterfly.  My mother always convinced me, at the end of the day, to free the little creature into the wild where it belonged.

My next-door neighbor, Johnny, liked to squash caterpillars or decapitate them.   I think the more horrified I was by his actions, the more fun he had doing terrible things to tiny, harmless, helpless creatures.

In denial that there is a Republican War on Women, RNC chair Reince Priebus likened that claim to “a war on caterpillars.”  What an interesting allusion!   What we women are calling “the war on women” is rooted in various stances taken by  Republican candidates for president this primary season, candidates  who would ban Planned Parenthood from public funding  and oust women from the workplace,  in tandem with actions in the Republican Congress that would limit women’s access to health care.

These extreme anti-female actions and commentaries have been compared to attitudes held by the Taliban.  Looking at the life-cycle of the lowly little caterpillar, we see some validity in the metaphor.

Eventually, the fuzzy little caterpillar winds around herself a silken shell of her own weaving, the pupa stage,  wherein she wears something akin to a burka and hangs out on a branch – forbidden to circulate in public, as it were.

Science Dictionary
pupa  (py ‘pə) Pronunciation Key
(click for larger image in new window) Plural pupae  (py ‘pē)
An insect in the nonfeeding stage of development between the larva and adult, during which it typically undergoes a complete transformation within a protective cocoon or hardened case. Only certain kinds of insects, such as moths, butterflies, ants, and beetles, develop as larvae and pupae. Compare imago, larva, nymph.
The American Heritage® Science Dictionary
Copyright © 2002. Published by Houghton Mifflin. All rights reserved.
Cite This Source

Ultimately, the lovely, and equally delicate butterfly developing inside, breaks out of her shell and flutters away – but wait not in the Taliban world.  Only in the privacy of her husband’s presence may the woman free herself of the confinement of the burka.  He rules everything about her life in much the same way the Republican men (yes, I will be specific here since Olympia Snowe  has announced the end of her congressional career in opposition) appear to want to control the lives of women from their health care options through their right to work outside the home.

Using  either an unfortunate or purposeful metaphor,  Priebus cast women into a Kafkaesque role with his remarks.  Last night I went to bed as a woman.  I woke up this morning a larva.   Is there any lower echelon to which women may be assigned?

Read Full Post »

Secretary Clinton has released remarks about the election which I have yet to find.  When I do, they will be posted at Still4Hill.   Meanwhile, with the results still unofficial,  Aung San Suu Kyi,  carefully claims victory.  Here is this morning’s brief from Foreign Policy.

 

Monday, April 2, 2012 Follow FP: Facebook Twitter RSS

Aung San Suu Kyi hails ‘new era’ after apparent election win


Top news: Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi appears poised to win a seat in parliament in just the third election the country has held in the last 50 years. According to her National League of Democracy’s own tally, it won 43 of the 44 seats in contested in Sunday’s by-election. Official results have not yet been released.

“We hope this will be the beginning of a new era,” Aung San Suu Kyi said in a speech at her party headquarters in Yangon. If the results are confirmed, it would be a remarkable turnabout for the Nobel Peace Prize winner, who has spent most of the past 22 years under house arrest since her victory in the 1990 general election was overturned by Myanmar’s military government.

Read more  >>>>

Read Full Post »

OH!  This is one of those moments when I so wish I could have been in that crowd. This is a great read!   Everyone knows who Chelsea and Sandra are. New Yorkers know Christine well.  She’s the one with the auburn hair who stands just behind Michael Bloomberg’s shoulder in every shot she can get into and is probably going to be the next mayor.  Nicolle Wallace?  What can I say?  Anyone who worked as hard as she did to try to get Sarah Palin to understand campaign tactics and foreign policy (or even history and geography) gets an A+ in my book!  Wish I had been there.  Fun read.  HRC  looms large,  Rosenblum notes.

10:27 am Mar. 29, 2012

It’s been more than 30 years since women began to vote in greater numbers than men in presidential elections, and four since Hillary Clinton almost became the Democratic nominee for president. 

But of course Hillary didn’t make it, and it’s going to be at least another four years before a woman is nominated by either of the major parties.

“We’re either not having the right conversation,” moderator Chelsea Clinton told the seven-woman panel and a full audience last night at the 92nd Street Y, “or we’re not being heard loudly enough, whether we’re running in heels, or flats or boots.”

READ MORE>>>> (YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO!!!!)

Read Full Post »

Cross-posted  from Uppity Woman  per her request.

 March 27, 2012 by Anita Finlay (“Ani”)

In her WaPo article, Twenty Years On, ‘Year of the Woman’ Fades, Karen Tumulty offers many reasons why women have not attained anything approaching parity in political representation, after female membership in the House and Senate doubled in 1992:

“…They made their presence felt beyond Capitol Hill, with the passage of legislation that made the workplace more family-friendly, that directed more medical research to women’s health issues and that made the criminal justice system more responsive to domestic violence.”

Women now represent 16.8% of Congress.  We have now hit a plateau, Tumulty says.  Another way of putting it is stagnation.  The treatment received by Hillary Clinton, who won more votes than any candidate in Primary history, and Sarah Palin, only the second woman to get on a presidential ticket, served as horrifying cautionary tales rather than encouragement.  Why would more qualified women run for higher office when a misogynist gauntlet awaits them?  What I witnessed in 2008 made the bile rise in my throat from such a deep place that I had to get off the sidelines and take action.  The sum total of that action follows:

Ms. Tumulty notes Democrats have declared that Republicans are waging a “war on women.” But the current “war” is being confined once again to a cynical and controlled narrative designed to benefit the President’s re-election bid rather than addressing the underbelly of woman-hate that still seems to permeate all levels of society.

Dirty Words On Clean Skin is a shocking exposé about the real war on women….who’s buying, who’s selling – and why they get away with it.

That war is waged daily by mainstream media, party backstabbers, opposing politicians, advertisers and lowbrow comedians of high powered television shows – all of whom miss no opportunity to degrade and marginalize; reducing women to body parts, wardrobe choices and vocal tics.

The quality and preparedness of Hillary Clinton was continually obscured by the bread and circuses of distraction and character assassination.  To a greater or lesser degree, these are tactics with which all females running for office have become acquainted.  We say the sky’s the limit for women in this country, but the reality was quite different when we were presented with a test case.

I am so proud to share my work with all of you and will be doing a pre-launch of Dirty Words on Clean Skin for all my kind blogger buddies and readers.  The book will be available on Amazon as of April 3rd…The book’s main launch will be April 24th and it will also be available on Kindle at that time.

Your encouragement has both fed me, and taught me to think critically, to make an argument, to stand my ground.

I am grateful to you all.

Read Full Post »

If there were a reality show called “Who’s the REAL Feminist?” Andrew Sullivan evidently considers himself a candidate for judge.  He, predictably,  had the unmitigated gall to assume the role of “feminist maven”on an “Overtime” segment of HBO’s Bill Maher Show.  How appropriate!

He debated the issue with Wendy Schiller, associate professor at Brown University on the segment.  Talk about picking your opponent!  Sullivan, once again, has shown himself to be the good old misogynist we have all come to know and despise.  There is a video in the article. WordPress would not accept the code, so I could not post it here.  You can watch it when you click into The Daily Caller article.

Andrew Sullivan slams Hillary Clinton: ‘Not a feminist’

Published: 6:26 PM 03/24/2012

On Friday’s “Overtime” segment of HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher,” Newsweek columnist and The Daily Beast’s “The Dish” blogger Andrew Sullivan made a comparison between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

According to Sullivan, Thatcher’s legacy was “amazing” because she never played the sex card.

“Thatcher was amazing to me because … she never allowed another woman in her own cabinet, by the way, ever, in 11 years,” Sullivan said. “She’s also a woman in the 50s, got educated in chemistry and had a family and ran as a single woman, and never once in her entire life played the sex card. Never, never played it.”

“… she never allowed another woman in her own cabinet.”  What a testament!  These women would probably disagree with Judge Sullivan.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

There are many, many more like them.  Hillary Clinton has worked for 40 years for women, children, and families.  As Secretary of State,  her signature issue has been the empowerment of women and girls.   Meryl Streep stated,  introducing this amazing woman,  a hero to so many of us,  at the Women in the World Summit this month, that there are women in the world who are still alive today only because they had their pictures taken with Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Comparing her unfavorably with the woman who showed not an ounce of empathy with the mothers of the Long Kesh hunger strikers, defies reason and serves to disqualify Sullivan as any kind of judge of feminism.

How dare you, Andrew Sullivan!  You crossed the line, and we are watching you!

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »