With advice and counsel from the History in Action e-mail list, I wrote up the Open Letter below to protest the way the media slanders the women's movement as indifferent to the human rights of women in the developing and/or Muslim world. Fact: it's feminists who first identified atrocities against women around the world--female genital mutilation, forced marriage, child marriage, spousal violence, rape-- as violations of human rights, not family matters or customs of no state importance. It is feminists who have consistently pushed for women's rights to education, health care, and legal and social equality and who've pushed organizations from the UN to Amnesty International to broaden their perspective to include women's rights to be free from violence and coercion. "Women's rights are human rights" was not a slogan dreamed up by David Horowitz or Christina Hoff Sommers.

In only four days, the Open Letter has gathered 700 signatures. it's been signed by people from all walks of life and every part of the country: writers, scholars, students, activists, leaders of feminist organizations and global health organizations, doctors, nurses, kindergarten teachers, clergypeople, stay-home mothers and so on and on--to say nothing of a whole bunch of people who simply describe themselves as "feminist."

If you'd like to sign, send your name to me at kpollitt@thenation.com, and be sure include how you would like to be identified; for example, writer, professor (with department and university), activist, astronaut, parent, movie star. if you are active with a feminist/progressive or global organization or NGO, that would be a good thing to mention. I would like the list to show that all sorts of women, and men, are feminists and how many are actively working for women's human rights. And yes, men can sign!

An Open Letter from American Feminists

Columnists and opinion writers from The Weekly Standard to the Washington Post to Slate have recently accused American feminists of focusing obsessively on minor or even nonexistent injustices in the United States while ignoring atrocities against women in other countries, especially the Muslim world. A number of reasons are given for this supposed neglect: narcissism, ideological rigidity, reflexive anti-Americanism, fear of seeming insensitive or even racist. Yet what is the evidence for this apparently now broadly accepted claim that feminists don't support the struggles of women around the globe? It usually comes down to a quick scan of the home page of the National Organization for Women's website, observing that a particular writer hasn't covered a particular outrage, plus a handful of quotes wrenched out of context.

In fact, as a bit of research would easily show, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of US feminist organizations involved in promoting women's rights and well-being around the globe--V-Day, Equality Now, MADRE, the Global Fund for Women, the International Women's Health Coalition and Feminist Majority, to name some of the most prominent. (The National Organization for Women itself has a section on its website devoted to global feminism, on which it denounces a wide array of practices including female genital mutilation (FGM), "honor" murder, trafficking, dowry deaths and domestic violence). Feminists at Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the United Nations have moved those organizations to add the rights of women and girls to their agenda. Feminist magazines and blogs--Ms. magazine, Feministing.com, Salon.com's Broadsheet column, womensenews.com (which has an edition in Arabic)--as well as feminist reporters and commentators in the mainstream media, regularly report on and condemn outrages against women wherever they occur, from rape, battery and murder in the US to the denial of women's human rights in the developing or Muslim world.

As feminists, we call on journalists and opinion writers to report the true position of our movement. We believe that women's rights are human rights, and stand in solidarity with our sisters who are fighting for equal political, economic, social and reproductive rights around the globe. Specifically, contrary to the accusations of pundits, we support their struggle against female genital mutilation, "honor" murder, forced marriage, child marriage, compulsory Islamic dress codes, the criminalization of sex outside marriage, brutal punishments like lashing and stoning, family laws that favor men and that place adult women under the legal power of fathers, brothers, and husbands, and laws that discount legal testimony made by women. We strongly oppose the denial of education, health care and equal political and economic rights to women.

We reject the use of women's rights language to justify invading foreign countries. Instead, we call on the United States government to live up to its expressed commitment to women's rights through peaceful means. Specifically, we call upon it to:

--offer asylum to women and girls fleeing gender-based persecution, including female genital mutilation, domestic violence, and forced marriage;

--promote women's rights and well-being in all their foreign policy and foreign aid decisions;

--use its diplomatic powers to pressure its allies--especially Saudi Arabia, one of the most oppressive countries in the world for women--to embrace women's rights;

--drop the Mexico City policy--aka the "gag rule"--which bars funds for AIDS- related and contraception-related health services abroad if they provide abortions, abortion information, or advocate for legalizing abortion;

--generously support the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), which supports women's reproductive health including safe maternity around the globe, and whose funding is vetoed every year by President Bush;

--become a signatory to The Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the basic UN women's human rights document, now signed by 185 nations. The US is one of a handful of holdouts, along with Iran, Sudan, and Somalia.

Finally, we call upon the United States, and all the industrialized nations of the West, to share their unprecedented wealth, often gained at the expense of the developing world, with those who need it in such a way that women benefit.

Signed,

Katha Pollitt, writer
Marge Piercy, writer
Susan Faludi, writer
Alix Kates Shulman, writer
Julianne Malveaux, president, Bennett College for Women
Anne Lamott, writer
Mary Gordon, writer
Linda Gordon, historian, NYU
Jennifer Baumgardner, writer
Ruth Rosen, historian
Jane Smiley, writer
Anna Fels,MD, psychiatrist and writer
Debra Dickerson, writer
Margo Jefferson, writer
Jessica Valenti, writer
Dana Goldstein, The American Prospect
Karen Houppert, writer
Gloria Jacobs, The Feminist Press
Carole Joffe, professor of sociology, UC Davis
Janet Afary, Middle East historian, Purdue University

And more than 700 more women and men.

Please add your name to this powerful list, and thanks.

Update: You can read the complete list of signatories to date here, and, of course, you're most welcome to sign the letter at any time.

Comments (69)

1. Well, Ms Pollitt, hate to say it, but....

   it sure SEEMS that way.

   Look at your new colleague Jessica Valenti, a feminist to be sure, and what have her articles been on? Genital mutilation? Islamic oppression? Choice in Mexico?

   Nope...try Chris Matthews, Mike Huckabee, "election tips" jokes, the "Daddy State" and Mitt Romney being ambivalent about the VAWA.

   Posted by Mask at 01/20/2008 @ 09:43am

2. Anyone But Clinton. Feminists are brilliant, its pseudo-feminists - every group of decent brilliant Americans has it's little sub-section of fools - feminists included. Christians are always having to say we arent like those bad ones over there.

   The media always likes to give indulge the biases of the willfully un-informed by giving excess coverage to the airhead wing of any Liberal group - just like the moderate-conservative bi-partisan BS compromising not-wanting-to-appear-soft caving in DLC wing of the Democrats.

   Posted by conshame at 01/20/2008 @ 11:43am

3. Nice letter, Cypher.

   One brief comment.

   "The womens' movement in the US is currently broadly backing a candidate for President (Hillary) who gleefully supported Bill Clinton's economic strangulation of Iraq.

   I would humbly suggest that tacitly might be more appropriate than gleefully in that passage.

   But good to have you back in the mix, Sy ;-)

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 01/20/2008 @ 11:53am

4. KATHA,

   I bring you Exhibit A, from the Nevada thread, as to why Feminism is discredited MORE and MORE....

   Here, we have a Professor disowning any `Progressive' that "vote for a man"! Any thoughts?

   (below) Posted by HAMILTONGRAD 01/20/2008 @ 12:58am

   As a professor of Women's Studies, I too agree that any vote against Hillary is vote against feminism. Any vote for any other candidate is standing for the men who have suppressed us for thousands of years. Our country has been the least democratic for Women's rights of any nation on earth, given our territorial limitations of both mind and geography. How can any progressive vote for a man ???

   Posted by Happy at 01/20/2008 @ 11:54am

5. ms. pollitt,

   have you been watching foxnews? seems like you're blaming islam for the plight of women.

   what about amish or mennonite women? same"ish" dress code. same rules. it's more a question of "old school".

   genital mutilation is performed in about 28 african countries, usually NOT by muslims, but by practitioners of other beliefs.

   check out the map:

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Fgm_map.gif

   plus women are treated badly everywhere:

   In the United States, a woman is beaten every 18 minutes. Indeed, domestic violence is the leading cause of injury among women of reproductive age in the United States. Between 22 and 35 per cent of women who visit emergency rooms are there for that reason.

   In Peru, 70 per cent of all crimes reported to the police involve women beaten by their husbands.

   According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, in the 400 cases of domestic violence reported in 1993 in the province of Punjab, nearly half ended with the death of the wife.

   In China and India, some women choose to terminate their pregnancies when expecting daughters but carry their pregnancies to term when expecting sons.

   In Bangladesh, a bride whose dowry was deemed too small was disfigured after her husband threw acid on her face. In India, an average of five women a day are burned in dowry-related disputes -- and many more cases are never reported.

   In the United States, national statistics indicate that a women is raped every six minutes.

   In Thailand, prostitutes who complain to the police are often arrested and sent back to the brothels upon payment of a fine.

   Many women and girl children are trafficked across borders, often with the complicity of border guards. In one incident, five young prostitutes burned to death in a brothel fire because they had been chained to their beds. At the same time, sex tours of developing countries are a well-organized industry in several European and other industrialized countries.

   In the Middle East and Persian Gulf region, there are an estimated 1.2 million women, mainly Asians, who are employed as domestic servants. According to the independent human rights group Middle East Watch, female migrant workers in Kuwait often suffer beatings and sexual assaults at the hands of their employers.

   http://www.un.org/rights/dpi1772e.htm

   unfortunately, i can find many more examples from many, many places. it's not islam, it's assholes.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 01/20/2008 @ 12:59pm

6. does one have to be a "feminist" to become engaged in ending oppresion against those with XX chromosomes? i simply don't see why ending said oppression includes the necessity of self-identifying as a "feminist".

   and this comes from a herb-growing, goddess-worshipping, sex-positive woman of color.

   Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2008 @ 3:26pm

7. if feminists will only help other women, then do they not presume that women are necessarily in need of more help than men? and, by logical extension, do they presume that other women are weaker than men (a presumption that, in itself, presumes inequality, rather that its opposite)?

   my point is: if women can do all the things that can do, then why are women in more need of help than men?

   Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2008 @ 3:47pm

8. feminism is over. the entire civil rights movement is over, if we continue to value biological determinism over all other indicators of identity.

   people talk of black rights. a black person, like myself, is treated differently because.......i happen to have absorbed more sun than some guy from ireland?

   i am black ONLY because i have absorbed more sun than others. that is the only reason i am black.

   now, if my people were taken away from our homeland because we absorbed a lot of sun, then how do you explain the slavery of white people?

   biological determinism is a very harmful intellectual phenomenon, and we should do all we can to avoid it.....

   Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2008 @ 3:51pm

9. feminists unite! unite for ALL the disenfranchised and underpriviledged and sick and dying, not just women.......hell, united for TREES! the trees are f*cked!

   Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2008 @ 3:59pm

10. To MASK: Jessica Valenti is among the very important voices in getting the message across that FEMINISM is NOT the dirty word the right-wing punditry brigade (which indeed includes David Hororwitz and Christina Hoff Sommers) has made it out to be. So what if she's mentioning Chris Matthews and other so-called "trivial" matters? There is no such thing as a trivial matter to a feminist. ALL issues in EVERY CORNER OF THE GLOBE are important issues. I have become a fan of Jessica's blog "Feministing" in recent months and am currently reading her urgently important book FULL FRONTAL FEMINISM. I encourage anyone who has issues with the word FEMINISM to read it. It will have you embracing the word FEMINISM (again), and will rid you of the shame you may have previously felt about it.

    By the way DARLADOON, to quote from the aforementioned book ..."You are a Feminist, I swear ..."

    I will sign the petition with deep pride. We need to send the LOUD AND CLEAR MESSAGE to that right-wing punditry brigade that feminism is a GOOD THING.

    Posted by unashamed at 01/20/2008 @ 4:05pm

11. DARLADOON, chill. Once again, with feeling ... YOU ARE A FEMINIST, I SWEAR ...

    Feminists help women out every day. IT IS NOT DEAD. Quit your complaining and denying and GET ACTIVE. That's how we help other women (and even men, and GLBT people ...)

    Posted by unashamed at 01/20/2008 @ 4:08pm

12. I did not mean for that to be a personal attack. I am just tired of all the denying and complaining out there. The REAL action is in activism. Another excellent book on the matter is GRASSROOTS by Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards. Read that, too!

    Posted by unashamed at 01/20/2008 @ 4:10pm

13. Some good counterpoints today.

    In a tribute to feminism and other valid movements for social justice, I repost the brilliant Ishmael Reed piece from CounterPunch.org the other day.

    Ma and Pa Clinton Flog Uppity Black Man

    Excerpt:

    Having been educated at elite schools where studying The War of the Roses was more important than studying Reconstruction, the under educated white male punditry and their token white women, failed to detect the racial code phrases that both Clintons and their surrogates sent out- codes that, judging from their responses, infuriated blacks caught immediately. Blacks have been deciphering these hidden messages for four hundred years. They had to, in order to survive.

    Gloria Steinem perhaps attended the same schools. Her remark that black men received the vote "fifty years before women," in a Times Op-Ed (Jan.8) which some say contributed to Obama's defeat in New Hampshire, ignores the fact that black men were met by white terrorism, including massacres, and economic retaliation when attempting to exercise the franchise. She and her followers, who've spent thousands of hours in graduate school, must have gotten all of their information about Reconstruction from Gone With The Wind, where moviegoers are asked to sympathize with a proto-feminist, Scarlett O'Hara, who finally has to fend for herself after years of being doted upon by the unpaid household help. Booker T. Washington, an educator born into slavery, said that young white people had been waited on so that after the war they didn't know how to take care of themselves and Mary Chesnutt, author of The Civil War Diaries, and a friend of Confederate president Jefferson Davis's family, said that upper class southern white women were so slave dependent that they were "indolent." Steinem and her followers should read, Redemption, The Last Battle Of The Civil War," by Nicholas Lemann, which tells the story about how "in 1875, an army of white terrorists in Mississippi led a campaign to 'redeem' their state--to abolish with violence and murder if need be, the newly won civil rights of freed slaves and blacks." Such violence and intimidation was practiced all over the south sometimes resulting in massacres.

    --By all means, I recommend the entire essay. It's a treat.

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 01/20/2008 @ 4:11pm

14. and even men, and GLBT people

    if you are helping men, then why the designation "feminist"?

    let's be honest here, it was purely an accident that i have a pussy, or XX chromosomes, or breasts, or vaginal fluids, or oestregen, or menopause, etc etc.....

    why should i focus my efforts only on those who suffered the same accident?

    your retort, i'm sure, will be "well, we help men out too". so again, i go back to my original question, why the designation "feminist"? isn't that entirely misleading?

    Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2008 @ 4:19pm

15. Posted by DARLADOON 01/20/2008 @ 4:19pm

    To my mind, feminist and masculinist are two sides of the same coin. Why one or the other often has to do with where you place your focus, and I think it is an incontravertible fact that people of the same gender understand the problems faced by that gender, better than people of the opposite gender. It may be an accident, but it's an important accident that shapes you nonetheless.

    Also, gender equalitist, somehow, sounds funny. If you have ideas for a better name, I would love to hear them.

    Posted by srjenkins at 01/20/2008 @ 4:32pm

16. great letter. excellent letter, ms. pollit. i will most definitely sign. thanks, again!

    Posted by loveloki at 01/20/2008 @ 4:43pm

17. Posted by UNASHAMED 01/20/2008 @ 4:05pm

    While I have only read Jessica Valenti here, if it is representative, I would argue she is undermining feminism. Her commentary is rife with double standards, poor argumentation, and juvenile "gotcha" framing - all of which can be cited as good reasons to safely trivialize the very movement she claims to support by people that don't already agree with her.

    I consider myself a feminist. It's not a word I'm scared of. But there are many different strains. I think bell hooks has many more interesting things to say than someone like Andrea Dworkin, who in my opinion was a misandrist and helped the very structures she railed against. I'm not for a Dworkin style feminism. A feminism that doesn't hold gender equality at its center or worse, demonizes men and priviledges women, well, I'm not that kind of feminist, nor do I support the people that are. Further, I would argue that isn't feminism at all.

    Posted by srjenkins at 01/20/2008 @ 4:54pm

18. feminism like cigarettes and drugs are bad for children, thinking people and other lving things...

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/20/2008 @ 7:06pm

19. Ms. Pollitt, you were doing OK until I got to this part:

    "Specifically, we call upon it (the US) to:

    • promote women's rights and well-being in all their foreign policy and foreign aid decisions;

    Support for women's well being in all their foreign policy and aid decisions?! What does that mean?

    • use its diplomatic powers to pressure its allies -- especially Saudi Arabia, one of the most oppressive countries in the world for women -- to embrace women's rights;

    How about letting the Saudis step up and allow us to step back instead?

    • drop the Mexico City policy--aka the 'gag rule'--which bars funds for AIDS-related and contraception-related health services abroad if they provide abortions, abortion information, or advocate for legalizing abortion;

    I have to say I agree with the gov't stance on this one. We need the US to step back. Let those nations take the lead on their own reproductive health issues. I know it sounds cruel and unforgiving and our nation have made dramatic strides (not in the eyes of some) but, if we keep giving them handouts, they will never be free of the oppression. Let them learn how to appreciate the struggle.

    • generously support the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), which supports women's reproductive health including safe maternity around the globe, and whose funding is vetoed every year by President Bush;

    I'd say yes to safe maternity clinics in the rural areas (and if we do it ourselves) and no to giving any funding to the UN.

    • become a signatory to The Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the basic UN women's human rights document, now signed by 185 nations. The US is one of a handful of holdouts, along with Iran, Sudan, and Somalia.

    We don't need to sign off on another piece of paper from the UN. We already have anti-discrimination laws.

    Finally, we call upon the United States, and all the industrialized nations of the West, to share their unprecedented wealth, often gained at the expense of the developing world, with those who need it in such a way that women benefit.

    No. If everyone cannot benefit from "sharing the wealth", then no one will.

    Posted by ACook at 01/20/2008 @ 7:12pm

20. So what if she's mentioning Chris Matthews and other so-called "trivial" matters? There is no such thing as a trivial matter to a feminist. ----Posted by UNASHAMED 01/20/2008 @ 4:05pm

    Then your argument is with Katha Pollitt in this article, not me.

    Posted by Mask at 01/20/2008 @ 7:22pm

21. and this comes from a herb-growing, goddess-worshipping, sex-positive woman of color.

    Posted by DARLADOON 01/20/2008 @ 3:26pm | ignore this person

    That's a heck of a resume there Darla. I like it!!!

    Posted by FritztheCat at 01/20/2008 @ 8:20pm

22. the only feminist i can understand is eve sedgwick, perhaps helene cixous

    Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2008 @ 8:29pm

23. and this comes from a herb-growing, goddess-worshipping, sex-positive woman of color.

    Posted by DARLADOON 01/20/2008 @ 3:26pm

    have i got a country for you!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/20/2008 @ 8:30pm

24. biological determinism is a very harmful intellectual phenomenon, and we should do all we can to avoid it.....

    Posted by DARLADOON 01/20/2008 @ 3:51pm

    ooooh,

    10 more points for you.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/20/2008 @ 8:33pm

25. Also, gender equalitist, somehow, sounds funny. If you have ideas for a better name, I would love to hear them.

    Posted by SRJENKINS 01/20/2008 @ 4:32pm

    how about "unstoopid human"?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/20/2008 @ 8:36pm

26. feminism like cigarettes and drugs are bad for children, thinking people and other lving things...

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 01/20/2008 @ 7:06pm

    so how did they get the right to vote?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/20/2008 @ 8:40pm

27. to make an analagous argument: when asked to describe himself, an intelligent man would never use the adjective "intelligent," just as a black person would (or at least, should) never use the adjective "black". what does black-ness add to one's character? why would a white person never self-identify as white, when whiteness is so incredibly unpopular in american culture?

    Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2008 @ 8:58pm

28. Katha,

    No, thanks. This woman -- and African American -- will not sign your petition. I have lost all patience with you self-absorbed, self-pitying, self-important, shrill bee-atches.

    I wholeheartedly embrace the full and unfettered protection of all HUMAN rights for all the world's humans: men, women, boys and girls, but you can take your petition and burn it with your bras.

    If your candidate Hillary Clinton paid anything more than lip-service to human rights, she would not have allowed her husband to ignore brutally violent deaths of men, women and children in Rwanda. 800,000 people (minimum estimates) in 100 days. If Ms. Clinton was truly concerned about humans -- not just paying lip service -- 35 million (again minimum estimates) American men women and children would not go bed hungry, sleep on the streets, in their cars, in shelter in this country. Hillary has two palatial homes: Chappaqua and Embassy Row in DC.

    The feminist agenda is not about improving lives of real people, but a select group of elitist, urban women, living very comfortable lives. Feminists -- read that "a certain class of white women" -- piggy-backed the civil rights movements, to secure "rights and privileges" for women already raised in the comfortable cocoon of white privilege. Feminists -- so busy raising their own consciousnesses -- even overlooked their rural sisters who worked full-time on farms and factories in the heartland, doing piecework and hard labor. The "joys of feminism" did not trickle down to them or their daughters. Feminists didn't roll up their sleeves and wade into the fields to pick crops next to their migrant and immigrant sisters. They didn't find their way to the reservations. No, they donned their stylish aviator glasses and dyed and streaked their hair blonde. They whined about being sexually "objectified" by men and crowed about being "liberated."

    (Let's see who can I quote: "Gimme a break. This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen.")

    The best thing "American feminists" can do for the rest of the world is leave them alone. You are culturally bereft, morally bankrupt, and out of touch with the hard reality of life in the rest of the world. Without a Starbucks on every corner, not a one of you could survive the rigors of everyday life that these women survive daily.

    Take your Open Letter, take your petitions, take your righteous indignation and shove it.

    Posted by jade7243 at 01/20/2008 @ 9:05pm

29. jade,

    i'm sorry, but you're pretty much wrong on everything there. i'm not a feminist, but what you're talking about is simply outrageous.

    feminism had its moment, for sure. it was extremely relevent for its first 3 waves, but now it is merely nostalgic.

    Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2008 @ 9:12pm

30. darla, if you can understand--as in comprehend--eve and helene, then you can pretty much comprehend anyone. did you mean to say the only feminists you can relate to are eve and helene?

    all, did i miss something in the open letter from american feminists about hillary clinton? i think "american feminism" is a pretty diverse group.

    Posted by loveloki at 01/20/2008 @ 9:42pm

31. Posted by JADE7243 01/20/2008 @ 9:05pm

    I couldn't agree with you more.

    Posted by ACook at 01/20/2008 @ 10:03pm

32. loveloki,

    no, what i mean to say is that eve is the only one with whom i agree, and cixous is the only other one, besides eve, whom i respect, but with whom i don't necessarily agree.

    Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2008 @ 10:05pm

33. Posted by LOVELOKI 01/20/2008 @ 9:42pm

    Not really.

    But, personally, I wouldn't put my name on that petition.

    Posted by ACook at 01/20/2008 @ 10:12pm

34. when whiteness is so incredibly unpopular in american culture?

    Posted by DARLADOON 01/20/2008 @ 8:58pm

    hey, watch it.

    :+]

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/20/2008 @ 10:24pm

35. jade, i'm an everyday woman. and i know all about how hard life can be. feminists have fought long and hard to get the right to vote, to combat violence, to get women into universities and into employment previously closed to women. feminists have helped all women. i know a few feminists, including my sister, who work on the reservation. they helped to get domestic violence laws enacted and enforced on the reservation. my mother worked on various reservations for many years.

    there are rich white women who are feminists. but there are many feminists who aren't privileged. a dear friend of mine risks her life every day to help mostly women and a few men escape from violence. she doesn't get paid much for what she does. there are no starbucks here. but even if there were, she couldn't afford to go there too often. ever heard of sojourner truth? i'm sure you have and i'm sure you know that she was a feminist.

    i was talking to an 18 year old mother of 2 a few months ago. she was a waitress for quite awhile. now she's a bartender. she's pretty poor. while she was waitressing, the cook continually referred to her as cunt. he constantly talked about sexual fantasies he had about her. she could have turned him in for sexual harassment. she said she did not because she did not want to get a rep in town as a troublemaker. she said it was hell to go to work everyday. she said she dreaded it in the pit of her stomach. she was so relieved when she finally found another job. this is the type of problem feminism addresses.

    so, hate gloria steinem all you want. i don't blame you after her article. but not all feminists are gloria steinem.

    Posted by loveloki at 01/21/2008 @ 12:13am

36. sojourner truth was still an american feminist zero. in my mind, she's one of the greater american feminists due to the adversity she faced. there are lots of american feminists not voting for hillary, zero. and i read the piece by ishmael quite awhile ago, when b kool posted it on some past thread while you were on your sabbatical. i thanked him for posting it then.

    i'm a little surprised that you admit to having taken me off your ignore list.

    Posted by loveloki at 01/21/2008 @ 12:15pm

37. why the continual references to Clinton?? I didn't see her mentioned once in this article.

    Posted by jro555 at 01/21/2008 @ 1:17pm

38. come on zero....tell the truth....you can do it. you are really here for your usual rant--"fuck women! i want to talk about the current plight of the poor poor downtrodden white male!"

    Posted by loveloki at 01/21/2008 @ 2:58pm

39. Darla and Loveloki...

    Sometimes the truth is bitter and not sweet. Darla defends nostalgic feminism, yet she claims she is not one of them.

    Loveloki re-invents history... with the "audacity" to ask if I know who Sojourner Truth was... Loveloki she was first and foremost a proud black woman who fought for the freedom of her black brothers and sisters.

    Re: your sexual harassment example: sounds to me like "feminism" didn't solve the woman's problem, did it?

    American feminist have wasted a lot of valuable political capital on vanity issues. Forty years post Dr. King, and the heyday of the feminist movement, AMERICAN women still don't earn an equal paycheck with men, AMERICAN women still don't have access to birth control nor have reproductive freedom, for example. So before you presume to tell Saudi Arabia about women driving, seems to me your own house needs some cleaning.

    There has always been a deep conflict between the rights of the truly oppressed in this country, and those for whom there is just a little "discomfort."

    Witness this exchange between Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Frederick Douglass with regard to the right to vote:

    During a heated meeting in New York City's Steinway Hall in 1869, Stanton wondered, "Shall American statesmen ... so amend their constitutions as to make their wives and mothers the political inferiors of unlettered and unwashed ditch-diggers, bootblacks, butchers and barbers, fresh from the slave plantations of the South?" At which point, Douglass rose, paid tribute to Stanton's years of work on civil rights for all, and replied, "When women, because they are women, are hunted down through the cities of New York and New Orleans; when they are dragged from their houses and hung from lampposts; when their children are torn from their arms and their brains dashed out upon the pavement; when they are objects of insult and rage at every turn; when they are in danger of having their homes burnt down... then they will have an urgency to obtain the ballot equal to our own."

    So no, I have no affinity for American feminists. They do not bring an agenda to the table which serves me -- or you -- effectively. So no thanks to Katha and her letter.

    Posted by jade7243 at 01/21/2008 @ 5:53pm

40. so how did they get the right to vote?

    Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 01/20/2008 @ 8:40pm

    Not from today's brand of feminism which is not about equality.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 01/21/2008 @ 6:00pm

41. Columnists and opinion writers from The Weekly Standard to the Washington Post to Slate have recently accused American feminists of focusing obsessively on minor or even nonexistent injustices in the United States while ignoring atrocities against women in other countries, especially the Muslim world.

    Don't take the bait, Katha!

    These reporters are trying to mobilize feminists in their New Crusade against Muslims and "perpetual" war for the benefit of the Military-Industrial-Complex.

    I say F..k them!

    Oppression of women happens EVERYWHERE, and as feminists, we are not going to single out MUSLIM oppression to assist you with your perpetual war!

    Posted by Metteyya at 01/21/2008 @ 6:04pm

42. This "petition" is just another empty gesture -- likely undertaken to kill a recurring bout of mid-life tedium.

    If given the choice, suffering women abroad would likely decline such a show of bourgeois sympathy. "Mind your own empty life!" I can hear them screaming, in unison.

    Posted by Adscititious at 01/21/2008 @ 7:03pm

43. i did not reinvent history jade. she was a feminist. she was also a pacifist.

    as far as feminism solving the sexual harassment of the waitress, she could have filed a complaint. then there would be a record of this man's behavior. i don't blame her for her fears. but perhaps the next waitress will be brave enough to confront him. the avenue is there. it was not before.

    feminists are battling to keep contraception available to women. if they were not, who would be? feminists are working to stop violence against women and help those who suffer from violence. my friend runs the domestic violence shelter here. it operates on a shoestring budget. they may not get the funding next year. if the place shuts down, she and i and other feminists like us will open our homes to help these victims.

    i could really care less if you hate feminists or not jade. but i wonder who you think will try to deal with these issues, if not feminists.

    Posted by loveloki at 01/21/2008 @ 8:47pm

44. Women's Convention, Akron, Ohio

    Well, children, where there is so much racket there must be something out of kilter. I think that 'twixt the negroes of the South and the women at the North, all talking about rights, the white men will be in a fix pretty soon. But what's all this here talking about?

    That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain't I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain't I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man - when I could get it - and bear the lash as well! And ain't I a woman? I have borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother's grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain't I a woman?

    Then they talk about this thing in the head; what's this they call it? [member of audience whispers, "intellect"] That's it, honey. What's that got to do with women's rights or negroes' rights? If my cup won't hold but a pint, and yours holds a quart, wouldn't you be mean not to let me have my little half measure full?

    Then that little man in black there, he says women can't have as much rights as men, 'cause Christ wasn't a woman! Where did your Christ come from? Where did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! Man had nothing to do with Him.

    If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down all alone, these women together ought to be able to turn it back , and get it right side up again! And now they is asking to do it, the men better let them.

    Obliged to you for hearing me, and now old Sojourner ain't got nothing more to say.

    Posted by loveloki at 01/21/2008 @ 8:52pm

45. check out "american pie," by patricia williams.

    Posted by loveloki at 01/21/2008 @ 8:54pm

46. or "reconstruction lessons" by eric foner. both of these lucid articles are on the nation's homepage.

    Posted by loveloki at 01/21/2008 @ 9:17pm

47. Not from today's brand of feminism which is not about equality.

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 01/21/2008 @ 6:00pm

    so, what's it about?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/21/2008 @ 9:54pm

48. Oppression of women happens EVERYWHERE, and as feminists, we are not going to single out MUSLIM oppression to assist you with your perpetual war!

    Posted by METTEYYA 01/21/2008 @ 6:04pm

    thank you.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/21/2008 @ 9:56pm

49. metteya and frosty, did you read the letter? muslims were not singled out. and the war thing is also addressed. just read the letter. oh and metteya, hillary didn't write it.

    Posted by loveloki at 01/22/2008 @ 12:20am

50. the letter talks about the oppression of women here, in developing countries and in muslim countries. can you read? and can you comprehend?

    Posted by loveloki at 01/22/2008 @ 12:23am

51. metteya, by purposely distorting what the letter said because you suspect all feminists support hillary, you are going exactly against what obama said in his incredible speech. i'm a feminist. i have always leaned toward voting for obama. but you're really not helping him here. perhaps you should listen to his speech again before you contribute more distortions on this particular thread.

    Posted by loveloki at 01/22/2008 @ 01:49am

52. Posted by JADE7243 01/20/2008 @ 9:05pm

    You took the words right out of my mouth. I couldn't of said it any better.

    Posted by k330k at 01/22/2008 @ 08:06am

53. metteya and frosty, did you read the letter? muslims were not singled out. and the war thing is also addressed. just read the letter. oh and metteya, hillary didn't write it.

    Posted by LOVELOKI 01/22/2008 @ 12:20am |

    loveloki:

    from the letter -- "especially the Muslim world."

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/22/2008 @ 09:39am

54. For all of her supposed "concern" for others, Loveloki is just another beatttccchhy shrill fanatic. Sort of reminds me of Katha. In fact, they may be one and the same.

    Posted by Steve1us at 01/22/2008 @ 4:07pm

55. Posted by STEVE1US 01/22/2008 @ 4:07pm

    boooooooooooooo!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/22/2008 @ 10:17pm

56. Sort of reminds me of Katha. In fact, they may be one and the same.

    Posted by STEVE1US 01/22/2008 @ 4:07pm | ignore this person

    that's the best compliment i've received in a long long time. thanks little stevie.

    Posted by loveloki at 01/23/2008 @ 01:09am

57. what a cute widdle fella

    Posted by loveloki at 01/23/2008 @ 01:10am

58. More politically correct cocktail posturing while the real world poltical leadership of women in the US flexes that muscle of complicit macho brutality as outlined in these responses. Meanwhile, here in the US, complicit feminists first and foremost are NEVER "traders to their class" seeking to trash their exploited sisters rather than own up to the Clinton's any means necessary tactics to cover their own asses.

    Posted by Lil at 01/23/2008 @ 07:45am

59. Well, Ms Pollitt, hate to say it, but....

    it sure SEEMS that way.

    Look at your new colleague Jessica Valenti, a feminist to be sure, and what have her articles been on? Genital mutilation? Islamic oppression? Choice in Mexico?

    Nope...try Chris Matthews, Mike Huckabee, "election tips" jokes, the "Daddy State" and Mitt Romney being ambivalent about the VAWA.

    Posted by MASK 01/20/2008 @ 09:43am | ignore this person

    "Yet what is the evidence for this apparently now broadly accepted claim that feminists don't support the struggles of women around the globe? It usually comes down to...observing that a particular writer hasn't covered a particular outrage, plus..."

    Next!

    Posted by cka2nd at 01/23/2008 @ 11:19am

60. "Columnists and opinion writers from The Weekly Standard to the Washington Post to Slate have recently accused American feminists of focusing obsessively on minor or even nonexistent injustices in the United States while ignoring atrocities against women in other countries, especially the Muslim world."

    Hello! Pollitt is responding to the fact that right-wing critics of feminists are highlighting what THEY say is feminist silence regarding the oppression of women in the Muslim world.

    Pollitt then cites the feminist organizations, publications, blogs and the issues and controversies they have addressed in other countries, but Zero demands that the entire feminist movement answer for a few women politicians in Washington, while Happy tars the entire movement with the idiocies of one self-identified academic. Thank you, SRJenkins, for stating the obvious about any large intellectual and political movement: "[T]here are many different strains."

    I don't call myself a feminist anymore because I don't find it to be an accurate intellectual description of my beliefs. But to lump all feminists, even all American feminists, into one ideological pot is so preposterous that it truly raises my ire. African-American, pacifist, Albany, NY City Councilwoman and socialist feminist Barbara Smith is not Gloria Steinam or Andrea Dworkin. Nor is she the late revolutionary Trotskyist feminist, Clara Fraser, for that matter, but that's okay.

    Loveloki has pointed out some of the fine feminists she knows and has worked with. I've worked with feminists who I respected enormously, and ones who were opportunistic shmucks. I can say the same about the gamut of conservatives, liberals and socialists I've worked with (christians and athiests, too). Whether you agree with feminism as an intelectual current or not, Pollitt has a valid point that the feminist movement in the U.S., as represented by many organizations, publications, journalists and leading individuals, does not ignore the oppression of women in the developing world, including in Muslim countries.

    Posted by cka2nd at 01/23/2008 @ 11:42am

61. ....while Happy tars the entire movement with the idiocies of one self-identified academic....

    Posted by CKA2ND 01/23/2008 @ 11:42am

    Guilty as charged....but allow me to make a minor correction: Not just "one"! Add-in Jessica, Katha, Hillary Clinton and her assorted gender-based supporters (Gloria Steinam and others here on the blog) to the mix as well.

    You've heard of Diminishing Returns, right? Me think that for all the energy American Feminists devote to "minor or even nonexistent injustices in the United States" and get back (maybe) miniscule incremental gains, arguably even incremental LOSS as backlash develops (hello, ZERO!).....why don't American Feminists devote their energies on "atrocities against women in other countries, especially the Muslim world"? Think of the millions of lives they could save or improve!!!!

    Seriously, why don't they link up w/global Women-centric organizations and get more `bang' for their estrogen-charged energies? I'll tell you why, they don't get PAYING CUSTOMERS, in terms fame, fortune, publicity and adulation of armchair Lib Women--living very comfortable lives--they cater to!

    PS: When you cite me, please use all caps! Everybody sprinkle "happy" or "Happy" in comments....my antenna is more wired to HAPPY, esp. for something longer than a quick comment!

    Posted by Happy at 01/23/2008 @ 12:17pm

62. To all the women here claiming how BAD feminism and feminists are, (and men for that matter) consider this - If you're ready to give up your right to vote, denounce your right to reproductive freedom and choice of contraception, loose your rights to attend a university of your choosing and otherwise be judged (mostly) based on merit, be willing to blame the women themselves who are victims of domestic violence/rape/violence etc. and close down all the shelters which provide them aid, give up your job and career so that you can dedicate the rest of your life to cooking your husbands eggs and washing his underwear, and eliminate/reduce any and all funding to causes important to women such as global women's health care, reproductive health care, groups working against genital mutilation, forced marriages, honor killings, etc. if you are one of these women who claims feminism and feminists are BAD for women and BAD for this country and the world, well then let me hear you say you are ready to accept all of the above points, and give up your own rights as well as being for all other women giving up these rights and causes that have been worked on over the years by, you know who, feminists.

    All of what I mentioned and more, are advances that have been made by women working for women's rights, aka feminists. When will those of you who have been denouncing feminists learn not to buy into what fox news and the right noise machine tell you to believe. Listen up, this is especially important because you are only being duped into taking positions against your own interest, much like politicians have used the religious right to garner votes, and working people to vote against their own interest and for policies that actually are damaging to them (i.e. globalization, and "patriot-act" type laws that compromise privacy and freedoms) Again, you are only going against your own interests when you listen and then repeat the media's rhetoric about feminists. When it comes down to it, the women's movement is directly responsible for women having the right to vote and many other freedoms, freedoms that apparently some women seem to either ignore, or ignorantly go against their own interests. Yes there are always more problems to address, and the issues facing women today are expansive, this is precisely why women need to be informed and not automatically believe the media's BS and false characterizations about feminists. I hear all the time women and young girls saying how they hate feminists and how feminism is BAD, but when you ask these same women if they would give up their right to vote, right to contraceptions, access to women's health, etc. etc. all of them will say HELL NO! Personally don't know any women who is ready to give up their right to vote except maybe Ann Coultergeist. The fact that Ms. Pollit writes this article about the media's characterization of feminists and the majority of the posts here are parroting these exact media characterizations of feminists as bad horrible selfish (insert rhetoric here) and the blatant disregard for these people to look at the facts and the history of what the movement has actually accomplished is only proof that what Ms. Pollit is talking about is a true problem. There's no way that women are going to make any advancement in these issues, especially the huge important global issues facing the third world, unless women stop letting themselves be divided by the media and politicians, and stop going against their own interests. I'm always going to be speaking out for women's rights and equality, but just remember when you continue to parrot the media rhetoric on feminism, you are only speaking against your own interest - unless of course you really do believe you are not deserving of even the right to vote.

    Posted by meeneecat at 01/23/2008 @ 6:41pm

63. Re: Zero, "I focused in particular on two areas of concern with respect to foreign women: "foreign policy" and "free trade". What I found was that:

    * In no case had any of these female leaders sponsored any legislation pertaining to the rights and well-being of foreign women.

    * In no case had any of these female leaders with great power - for example, Nancy Pelosi, or Hillary Clinton - caused to be voted on in the House or Senate any legislation specifically pertaining to the rights and well-being of foreign women. " etc. etc.

    Zero, you seem to be confusing "feminist" to mean all women who hold public positions or are in positions of power. I don't consider Pelosi much of a feminist, and with Hillary, I think you forget that she was instrumental in creating the SCHIP program which covers poorer children without healthcare, now this no doubt has been a very important program for women considering a disproportionate number of women are low-income, working-class single mothers. I'm not an expert on the rest of Hillary's record so I can't speak for that, but my point was that just because Pelosi and Clinton are WOMEN, that does not equate them with FEMINIST, and just because they are women, does not mean that they should hold the brunt of the blame for not passing laws helping women. Personally, I think your argument is a double standard, you criticize two women on their lack of legislation that supports women, yet forget that the Senate and House are made up of a group of diverse men and women who must work TOGETHER in order to pass laws, so what about the hundreds of OTHER politicians who have not been advocating for women? The fact that you want to equate "female politician" with feminist sounds to me that you have not even a good understanding of the ideas and tenets of feminism itself. Your argument criticizing these women for not passing certain legislation would be akin to you blaming say, a black politician for not passing laws that would correct (insert issue here) i.e. the huge disproportionate number of blacks in prison due to the racist drug war. Both arguments, the one you made and my example are extremely silly, your argument places the entirety of the blame on one person's shoulders simply because he or she is of a certain race or sex and didn't do something that would help others of the same race/sex. This argument just doesn't fly, it takes a movement of people working TOGETHER to enact change, this is why the women's movement is so important, and continues to be essential considering the huge problems we face at home and around the world.

    Posted by meeneecat at 01/23/2008 @ 7:04pm

64. MASK: Well, Ms Pollitt, hate to say it, but....

    it sure SEEMS that way.

    Look at your new colleague Jessica Valenti, a feminist to be sure, and what have her articles been on? Genital mutilation? Islamic oppression?

    Yeah, man, that was way hard. First I went to Google (http://www.google.com/, a so-called "search engine" - try it!) and typed "Jessica Valenti" into the little rectangular box, then I clicked on the second link which "Google" displayed, whereupon my web browser magically transported me to Valenti's own web site ""feministing" [feministing.com], then I pressed for a sec or two upon the little-known but powerful "Page Down" key on my keyboard, whence I arrived at:

    Quick Hit: Saudi Arabia will lift ban on women drivers

    Because of Saudi women's activism, the ban on women driving cars will be lifted at the end of the year. Women's rights organizer Fouzia al-Ayouni has said, "We have broken the barrier of fear." Posted by Jessica at 02:40 PM...

    That's from yesterday. Gosh, I'll be darned, it's an article by La Valenti herself dealing with women's rights in the Islamic world! And here you alleged that Ms. Valenti didn't care.

    Took about twenty seconds total. You coulda done that, and then you wouldn't be looking so stupid now. Remember: "Google" first! It's your friend!

    Posted by wkiernan at 01/23/2008 @ 11:03pm

65. As a self-described progressive feminist male "of a certain age" (ha,ha), I wish to here define my moniker as an attempt to critique the still overweening cultural paradigm under which we live, to wit: the Judeo-Christian patriarchy (Dan Brown's "The Da Vince Code's 'Sacred Feminism'" notwithstanding).

    Furthermore, and in the interest of trying to "Keep it simple Simon(e)," I wish to postulate what most here, I suspect, believe, and that is the idea that post-modern feminist theory is essentially about equality of opportunity. And the best way to achieve what we might also term meritocracy is to advocate for continued focus on relationships, especially with the ideal being that they all strive for "openness, equality, and separateness" (Kerr and Bowen, 1988).

    And lastly, thanks WKiernan for the good news about Saudi women gaining the right/opportunity to experience the indisputably powerful thrill of accelerating a ton or more of moving mass, in comfort, up to speeds unheard of for 99.999999999999999% of the time our species has dominated this lovely watery planet.

    Hope you all enjoyed One, two, three, GO! day today, the year's day of ACTION! (from Jackson...ville, Florida).

    Posted by lewwelge at 01/23/2008 @ 11:26pm

66. Google" first! It's your friend!

    Posted by WKIERNAN 01/23/2008 @ 11:03pm

    are you sure?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/24/2008 @ 01:32am

67. The proponents of such a letter must first be correct and then more honest before I'd put my name to such a document

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 01/24/2008 @ 4:22pm

68. Goodonya, Googlers!

    Posted by lewwelge at 01/25/2008 @ 12:22pm

69. Katha,

    That is a powerful document. I hope you're still accepting signatures, because my spouse and I both Emailed you to add our names to it.

    Posted by thisamus at 01/25/2008 @ 8:37pm