1. The first article, written by Kate Zernike and entitled Where Does Society Stand on Gender Matters, is a response to the Eliot Spitzer scandal and Hillary Clinton's campaign. "The politics of the last few months have certainly opened a spigot on the question of where exactly society stands on gender matters," writes Zernike. "Weren't we in what some people have long called a postfeminist era?" In reference to the Spitzer scandal, she observes the fact that men and women's reaction to the scandal were quite different; as a result, "even people who were unwilling to see it before are more likely to acknowledge the pervasiveness of sex stereotypes." The Clinton campaign, on the other hand, has entered the gender minefield (especially after Geraldine Ferraro's comments), which "explains why older women form the core of her support." The two issues are explicitly linked on Slate magazine's female blog (The XX Factor), on which Noreen Malone wrote that, "Oddly enough, it's taken Spitzergate - not Hillary's tears - to make me less dismissive of the feminist 'obligation' to vote for a woman." Unfortunately, in contrast to our beliefs a year ago when Hillary Clinton announced her candidacy, "it has proved harder to move the country beyond stereotypes." Even more important: "Some also argue that the media is not as quick to recognize misogyny as it is to recognize racism. The media is on eggshells about race, bus has blinders on about sex and gender stereotyping."
2. The second article is entitled Sexism in the Workplace and is written by Harriet Rubin. It documents, in a rather interesting and interactive manner, the differences between men and women in corporate America over the past 30 years. The startoff point: a book published in 1977 by Anne Jardim and her partner Margaret Hennig, entitled The Managerial Woman. Today, 52% of all middle managers are women. "Poof! Sexism in America - gone," write Rubin. "20 or 30 years ago, people thought it could actually work like that: deal with sexism and be done with it." With today's presidential race, the question of gender bias vs. racial bias is stirring things up and making us re-question just how far along we truly are. The article looks at it from a statistical perspective, pointing out key indicators such as women's pay rate, board seats and corporate-officer posts, which have all dropped in recent years. Among the Fortune 500 firms, for example, the number of female officers has declined each year since 2005, resulting in a low of only 14.8% of board seats in these companies being held by women. Still, the popular perception is that "women have it made": a female candidate for the White House, a woman House speaker,...There's nothing to discuss! "I've never had so much trouble getting people to talk to me," writes Rubin. "Nobody really wanted to get into it." Rubin also gets into the issue of power/success vs. femininity, particularly as portrayed in the media; it seems you cannot have one with the other. Case in point: Hillary Clinton's criticism for showing cleavage (which garnered her a 747-word censure by Pulitzer-prize winning, Washington-Post reporter Robin Givhan), followed by her refusal to pose for Vogue (which garnered the dismay of Anna Wintour).
So where is the feminist movement today? Is this election a good time to look back and reassess how far we've come along- and whether or not we are slipping back? How much does the media play into people's perceptions of the current levels of sexism and the country's sensitivity towards it?
No comments:
Post a Comment