Earlier today, lambert posted a piece about an effort by some women Clinton supporters to form a non-partisan group, called The New Agenda, to advance the interests of women in the wake of the sexism displayed during the primary. I have no idea whether this group, like the PUMAs will turn into anything in the long run. I do believe, however, that such groups are a good thing. Anger is a powerful motivator in terms of political organizing and action (which is why we so often hear politicians telling us to get over it). And there are a lot of angry women right now. To which I say - good.  Read more 

Cross-posted from The Global Sociology Blog.

Echidne has a great article over at Alternet regarding the non-sensical and stupid thesis that there are few women in politics because they do not have the ambition, drive and thick skin to face the political world. In other words, states the stupid thesis, they have an inner glass ceiling. This is idiotic, of course, Echidne lists all the relevant arguments, so, just go read, ok? Then come back and read some of the background I have to offer on this.

According to Paxton and Hughes (2007), women represent approximately half of the world’s population but only 16% of national parliaments. Of 190 countries, only 7 have women as head of the government. Women are 9% of ambassadors to the United Nations, 7% of the world’s cabinet ministers and 8% of the world’s mayors. In politics and government, the gender gap is extremely wide and well represents the global persistence of patriarchy.

In addition, in no country do women make half of the parliament even though a few countries come very close (See table). Interestingly, some countries of the global South seem to do a better job than some Western countries when it comes to promoting women in politics. After all, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Indonesia and Chile have or have had female presidents; in contrast, France and the United States have not.  Read more 

(Hideous table alert)

It’s official now, as it has been proclaimed from on high. We are now the United States of Omerica.

The following is excerpted from a hilarious posting by the Times of London:

“…And suddenly, with the men appeared the archangel Gabriel and the whole host of the heavenly choir, ranks of cherubim and seraphim, all praising God and singing: “Yes, We Can.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment…

Sure, it’s a spoof but it has an eery tone of warning [SOS!], suggesting that if we looked beyond the hype of the BO campaign and the infatuation of the media we would see the snake oil salesman made famous in countless Westerns. With the oratorical, persuasive talents these guys had, they could sell refrigerators to Eskimos.  Read more 

Cross-posted from The Global Sociology Blog.

Ok, Correntians, this is one of these long and substantial posts of mine where one of you shows up in the comments and summarizes the whole thing in 2 lines… making me look like a blabbering fool!

It’s been a while since I’ve done one of these posts on reports - most of the time by IRIN - on the deplorable conditions under which women and girls live in many parts of the world. However, the articles have been piling up in my Newsreader, so, it’s time for one. So here we go:  Read more 

Riverdaughter’s post today is a hilarious must-read.

Don’t know about you guys, but I’m fine with feminist women using stereotype-based humor like this; some of you may disagree. Similarly, I give far more latitude to men, GLBTs, ethnic, racial and religious groups to satirize their own groups. I freely state I’d be pissed to read something similar on Olbermann’s blog. Riverdaughter’s earned the right to speak so; KO hasn’t. Simple. The whines I often hear about this “double standard” seem either disingenuous or humanity-bereft; I’m never sure which it is.

The US Senate’s Ladies Auxilliary met on Tuesday to discuss women’s issues… [and] finished with a demonstration on scrapbooking campaign memorabilia.

In attendance were Senators Diane Feinstein (CA), Barbara Mikulski (MD), Amy Klobuchar (MN) and Barbara Boxer (CA).  Read more 

At CNN home page http://www.cnn.com/
Vote button is on lower right.

“Do you agree with Sen. Hillary Clinton that the press has ignored sexism in the campaign?”

GOP and Obama geeks dominate CNN, as usual, with these following astoundingly head-up-their-*#@! results:

Yes 42% 29581
No 58% 41631
Total Votes: 71212

On the morning of the West Virginia primary, Washington Post Associate Editor Kevin Merida published a blockbuster story about ugly racial incidents experienced by Obama campaign workers that continues to fuel debate.

Media pundits are now using it to prove that “Clinton is willing to ride these biases to the White House.”  Read more 

We’re in the middle of a war. No, make that two wars. We have military personnel being sent back to Iraq and Afghanistan on multiple tours of duty with less than the recommended amount of rest. We have stop/loss. There is no end in sight.

If you were the United States Government, what would you do with a medic who was perfectly willing to go out on combat missions in Afghanistan and won a Silver Star for repeatedly risking life and limb to save comrades? If you said, remove her from duty because she lacks a penis, then you are ready to lead this great nation into battle, my friend.  Read more 

(caution: rant zone ahead)

Last night I finished up six days in Wonderland.

You see, last week I agreed to allow Part 4 of my “Sexism and Misogyny” series to be serialized at FDL. That was a mistake. Part 4 was really just one big fat footnote to the rest of the series, that explained a nice big chunk in the variance in the levels of evidence of sexism. The only reason it wasn’t a footnote is because it took too long to explain that while the variance was related to the percentage of black voters in the electorate, the cause of the variance was the “shift” in the white vote that occurs in conjunction with the increase in the percentage of the black vote.

Now, even my eyes glazed over while writing that last sentence, so I’m assuming that most of yours did too while reading it.  Read more 

Marc Rudov, sexist wanker. Not that this is news.

Part 4 of Misogyny, Sexism, & the Gender Gap in the 2008 Election

In choosing a nominee, the Democratic Party will not merely be deciding who deserves to win, or who would make the best candidate. It will also be a decision about which poisoned landscape the Party wishes to compete upon —- one in which toxic wildflowers of misogyny and sexism are in full bloom, or one in which the poisonous weed of racism is a constant part of the environment, and needs the merest watering to completely despoil the land.  Read more 

Although old news, it’s news to me and worth talking about. What kind of people are these, really? We talk about sexism a lot on this blog, but as many have noted: what would it take to get you to use language like that, about your partner, in public? I honestly can’t imagine that.

My family is filled with passionate, flawed people who aren’t afraid to raise a voice (but never a hand) to each other. Harsh language is the salt of life, obviously I was raised to believe that too. But I don’t understand how something like this is ’normalized’ into the habits of two people married to each other and for whom public image matters. Recklessness? Carelessness? Lack of intelligence, tact? Hatred of women? Any answer is one that reflects poorly on McCain as a national figure, as someone we want to have a finger on the bomb.

Like I said, this is old news but it’s time to talk about it again, and again. Women will be really turned off by this, and should be reminded, McCain isn’t for us. I was reading some depressing statistics about low information people this morning, so let’s all do our part to keep the conversations and opinions properly focued. On McShame is a good place.

HOW THE GENDER GAP, SEXISM, AND MISOGYNY CHANGE THE OUTCOME IN INDIVIDUAL STATES

The gender gap in presidential elections is a well documented phenomenon. Almost without exception, women vote for Democratic candidates at a higher percentage than do men, while men vote for Republican candidates at a higher percentage than women. Moreover, men’s preference for Republican candidates is more pronounced than women’s preference for Democrats. In the 2004 election, nationally men gave Bush an 11 point lead (Bush 55%, Kerry 44%), while women gave Kerry a mere 3 point lead (Bush 48%, Kerry 51%).

Data from a recent (conducted Feb 26-28, released March 7) 50 state Survey USA (SUSA) poll of registered voters shows more than just a gender gap; it provides evidence that sexism and misogyny can have a profound impact in shaping electoral outcomes. The gender gap is nearly double the size when the matchup is John McCain vs. Hillary Clinton than when it is McCain
and Barack Obama. McCain/Clinton shows a 13.5% gap in registered voters and a 7% gap when it is McCain/Obama.  Read more 

REGIONAL COMPARISONS & BEST AND WORST STATES

The individual state cross tables from the SUSA 50 state general election poll demonstrate how the gender gap determines the winner in a very large number of states. But there is considerable variation between states themselves and within regions. Much of the variation appears to be related to other factors, such as race and racism, and how liberal/conservative a state is.  Read more 

[Welcome, Pollster.com readers!]

Misogyny, sexism, and the gender gap are alive and well in the American electorate.

Overall, men prefer McCain over either Democrat, while women prefer either Democrat over McCain. But the gender gap widens considerably when a woman is running. When McCain is matched with Obama, the gap is 13.9% (comprising 7% of voters), but when it is McCain versus Clinton, the gap nearly doubles to 26.9% (comprising 13.5% of voters.)

The expansion of the gender gap is due almost entirely to changes in how men vote. Only a few more women (1.6%, comprising 0.9% of all voters) prefer Clinton when matched with McCain than when Obama is matched with McCain—women pretty much stick with the Democrat regardless of whether its Clinton or Obama.

 Read more 

Remember when there was a burst of hope when a woman ascended to the Speakership of the House, and Hillary was the front runner? Remember when Barbara Boxer was beloved of progressives, before endorsing the Connecticut for McCain party candidate? Remember when Jackie Speier was the valiant survivor of a shooting incident that took the life of her employer and mentor Congressman Ryan?

You know why the public sours on Democratic Women politicians? Because the have a sense of entitlement, and they turn on the people who support them. Hillary is suffering not just because of her own sins, or the sexism of present contemporary society, a fact I get presented with every single day, but because of the arrogance of her cohort, the pure sense that the argument is over because of a kind of ownership built up by relationships. They can’t open their mouths without telling everyone that they do not care what other people think, that the girl’s tree house is closed and that anyone else will be clawed instantly for even looking at the rope.

That’s why the “B” word and even the “C” word so easily cross people’s lips, because everyone recalls back to the cheerleaders and class presidents of high school days.  Read more 

I have to take my car into the shop today, again. I take my car to the dealer, because of the slight discount I receive for being in the “five star” service program. Last time I took it in, for an oil change, they took it upon themselves to “fix” my upper tail light. I hadn’t noticed it was broken, but I thought at the time, “that was nice of them, I guess I don’t mind the extra charge.” Well, I’m minding it now.  Read more