A Cultural Revolution for Women’s Equality

Picture this: women burning their bras, protesting for the end of beauty pageants, and refusing to wear make up. What group of women do you think of? I’m sure that “feminists” are one of the first things that comes to mind. This is the image that people today, young and old, have of a century long movement that resulted in getting women the right to vote, the right to go to college, paved the way for women to have their own career, and petitioned for equal pay in the workplace. Now when you think of the first scenario, would you want to be associated with those “radicals?”  If you said “no”, you’re with the majority these days. We overlook pioneers such as Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Sojourner Truth, and Susan B. Anthony who spearheaded the movement. Betty Friedan, a name that we learn in school, is known as a historical figure but many don’t realize the controversy and movement that she sparked by writing The Feminine Mystique.  These are women that put themselves on the line to make sure that this generation would have the right to vote and equal pay for equal work.  While there have been great improvements from the days where women were essentially property of their husbands and lost their identity when they got married, we are still far behind the vision that these women had for us. Women are still paid, on average, $0.80 for every $1.00 a male in the same job would make.  They are put under enormous pressure to raise a family while still having a career, leaving them pressured to still adhere to a cookie cutter model that Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem worked against. These conditions are a far cry from true equality, so what can actually be done? Do we need another push for a constitutional amendment requiring equal rights or do we really need a cultural movement to change the notion that people have about a women’s role in society? Something needs to be done in order to truly give women the equality that they deserve and the opportunities that follow said equality.  In essence, a large grassroots movement is needed that incorporates qualities from first, second, and third wave feminism to make sure that true fairness is reached.  After the success is reached and people’s thought process has changed, it needs to be solidified with legislation.

In order to truly understand the state that women’s equality and the feminist movement are in, I think it’s essential to be aware of the basic parts of the first, second, and third waves of feminism.

The first wave of feminism came on the coattails of industrialization and after a surge in liberal politics (Krolokke 2005).  It began in the late 19^th century and continued into the early 20^th century. Primarily concerned with access and equal rights for women, in 1848 they had one of the most notable (and first) women’s rights conventions in Seneca Falls. Out of this convention emerged a pioneer of the first wave, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, when she outlined the “Seneca Fall Declaration.” It claimed the “natural equity of women and outlin[ed] the political strategy of equal access and opportunity” (Krolokke 2005).  This was the official beginning of the suffrage movement with the declaration as it’s sacred text. These women broke the mold of the “traditional woman” and spoke their mind. They actually used their voice to try to further a cause and didn’t conform to predisposed gender roles.  In 1913, Rebecca West said, “People call me a feminist when I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat or a prostitute” (Friedan 1967). West accurately shows how the status quo of society was changed with the feminist’s voices. The “suffragettes”, who fought solely towards voting rights for women, define this wave. However, there were some interwoven reforms such as abolition that also captured some of the same supporters. Finally, in 1920 the “Susan B. Anthony” amendment was added to the constitution. With this amendment the first wave of feminism concluded and it was unconstitutional to ban someone from voting based on gender.

After World War 1 and World War 2, there was a halt in the rapid movement towards equality. The nation, as well as the women’s rights advocates, was preoccupied by the wars. Rather than rallying around individual causes, citizens gathered around patriotism to support our country while at war.   It was not until the late 1960s and 1970s that there was a resurrection of feminism.  It came after the baby boom where women were having more children than ever and they were staying home to raise them. Shows like “Leave it to Beaver” portrayed a “cookie cutter” family where the wife/mother always had dinner waiting on the table when her husband came home from work. Women also felt an obligation to get married; the average age at marriage dropped to twenty and more girls were foregoing a college education to find a husband instead (Friedan 1967). A widely taught concept was, “feminine women don’t want careers, higher education, political rights—the independence and opportunities that the old-fashioned feminists fought for [was unnecessary]” (Friedan 1967). At a high school reunion, Betty Friedan (one of these cookie cutter wives at the time), noticed that her female classmates were not very happy. Sure they had the joy of raising a family but after making beds, preparing peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, and working to please their husband’s day in and day out they started to wonder, “Is this all that my life will become?”  Although everyone was thinking it, no one said anything until the publishing of Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique.  This second wave of feminism was radicalized pretty quickly. It started with a highly publicized protest of the “Miss America” pageant where women compared the contestants to cattle and threw bras, girdles, and fake eyelashes into the trash in protest (Krolokke 2005).  These women truly believed in empowerment through others so they tried to recruit other women to gain strength in numbers.  With more strength, a group of women advocated for the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA).  They had seen other minority groups such as African Americans, making headway in their own civil rights battle through legislation, so they thought the next logical step was a piece of legislation of their own.  Unfortunately, the ERA was not successful in the least bit. However, the ERA is not what most people think of when looking back on this era but rather the radicalism that ensued. Various arms of feminism manifested such as “difference second-wave feminism” and “standpoint feminism” all of which had their own interpretation of women’s superiority to men and how that should be recognized by society as a whole.  Some refused and condemned those that wore makeup or bras because they constrained their true femininity. Overall the wave’s impact was more social with victories in women pursuing careers and the right to have an abortion with Roe v. Wade in 1973.

The last major wave of feminism, sometimes known as “grrl feminism”, began in the early 1980s and there are still some inklings of it in present day society.  This was a more aggressive and less pompous attempt to resurrect the values that the pioneers instilled into the movement.  Society had changed from that of the 1960s; people were faced with the fall of communism and the rise of new threats to the world order. Women were being subjected to serious crimes of a more violent nature: trafficking, pornography, and body mutilation.  The media was much more prevalent than in the previous waves and played a part in decreasing the status of women once again (mainly with pornography and demeaning storylines in movies and television). The movement is identified by two main aspects: cyberfeminism and new alliances with other movements.  They used the new technology and the increasing globalization within the world not only to further their message but also as a tool to criticize. Many of the third wave feminists tried to establish a community known as “cyberfeminism” to empower women and realize their true worth in society. These communities were seen in feminist websites but also chat groups that women could participate in to express their grievances. .  Another technique they used was to embrace derogatory words such as “slut” and “bitch” and turn them around to make a point that these terms are used too casually and how ludicrous it is to use these words in the first place. Additionally, they started to form alliances with their “competitors” rather than try to work independently.  These “competitors” included African Americans as well as homosexuals. While there were concerted efforts within the members of this movement, unfortunately, nothing substantial was achieved.

This trip through feminist history has now landed us in October of 2011.  Since the end of the third wave of feminism there has been a “backlash”.  Women now are almost evenly represented in the work force but there is still large-scale discrimination and as mentioned earlier women are still getting paid less money for equal work.  While women are now integrated into the workforce they are still feeling the same 1950s pressure to get married and have children.  There is a balance that women need to find with getting an education and having a career with settling down with a man to have a family.  While women’s roles are expanding, men’s are not and they are not helping take care of their family despite the diminishing extra time that women possess.  Additionally, among the women that choose to put a career before marriage and family there is the feeling that men are not attracted to powerful women and there actually is a “shortage of men” (Faludi 1991).  This deters women from pursuing a powerful career and opting for the “M-R-S” Degree instead.  Faludi argues that these are myths solely constructed and solidified by the media in various television shows and movies.  Movies implant these myths into society and therefore subliminally become fact to women. These factors have all led to the “backlash” where women no longer have the fight in them to continue down the path created by the original pioneers.  After all of their hard work, how can we as women, give up? Something needs to be done.

I propose that my generation of women take a stand against this backlash and instead move forward into this next decade with guns-a-blazing.  There needs to be a cultural revolution of some sort where views towards women change substantially. Once this change is done, legislation that solidifies this equality will be much more politically feasible.

While it may seem that the past three feminist movements were unsuccessful because of the emergence of this backlash, there are qualities of each wave that should be adopted into this “fourth wave” or my self-deemed cultural revolution.  To begin, the suffragettes focused on one thing: voting rights for women and therefore it was much easier to achieve.  This next movement, instead of spreading resources among many women’s issues, needs to focus on one main goal just like those before us. This goal should be to establish the foundation for the cultural movement.  Changes need to happen that alter the viewpoints that men and women alike have towards women’s position in society.  Instead of having women bear the weight of child rearing, men and women should share the responsibility.  Women fought for equality in the work place but did not shift some accountability to men when it came to raising a family.  We like to think that we can do it all but at a certain point we need to shed some responsibility.  Men should pick up the slack in the home; on average women hold 70% of household responsibility and have careers (Dokoupil and Romano 2010).  Even when the man of the household is unemployed the woman still handles a majority of the domestic workload and if both are working, women spend 400% more time with their children (Dokoupil and Romano 2010). A focus should be on evening out this number. More men are becoming stay at home dads and “trophy husbands” but we need to increase this number and instead of stigmatizing these men and making fun of them they should be commended for having the courage to go against the status quo. There are established gender roles in society and now that women are altering theirs by having careers, men also need to alter their role by allotting more time to take on domestic responsibility. What is concerning is that people in my generation are not thinking about changing these roles; rather they are only solidifying them. With the increasing popularity of a website, “Total Frat Move,” college students think it’s the “cool thing” so be misogynistic.  A perfect example of the behavior that they promote is this post: “Moving the library’s cookbooks into the women’s studies section. TFM.” (Total Frat Move 2011).  This website is highly trafficked by college-aged students who see these posts and think that this is the way they should behave and act towards women.  Men post on this website because they believe it to be cool and funny and therefore women think that they need to fit that mold to be attractive to them. Men who post on this website are embracing their already established gender role and amplifying it.  I think there has been a resurgence with this website of behavior and attitudes that try to put women in their “rightful place”-the home. Websites such as Total Frat Move need to be disbanded in order for a change of viewpoint (in regards to equality) towards women in society.  With thoughts like these floating around, there is no way that women would be treated fairly and with respect in the workplace or even in day-to-day life. By placing all of our hard work on establishing new gender roles in society it will be more successful than if we were to spread out our efforts.  With this being said, a lot of work needs to be done in order to achieve this goal.

While many think that the work the women in the past generations have achieved all that needs to be done, there is a silent assault against women within the media. Movies such as “The Ugly Truth” and television shows such as “Private Practice” act as a catalyst for myths that professional women cannot find husbands and there’s an “infertility epidemic” (Faludi 1991). In “The Ugly Truth,” a powerful woman cannot seem to find a boyfriend and she’s convinced that something is wrong with her. The movie embellishes the idea that women with careers will have a hard time finding a relationship and then once they find it, actually maintaining it becomes an issue.  In “Private Practice”, the main character Dr. Addison Montgomery spent so much time devoted to becoming a world-class surgeon that she now is faced with fertility problems when she wants to have children. This exemplifies the notion that people think it’s a complete tradeoff between motherhood and a career. When women watch these movies and television shows they believe that this is reality and are deterred from pursuing a powerful career because they are afraid of the opportunity costs.  Changing the way that media portrays women and these “problems” is part of the cultural revolution that I am advocating for.  The media needs to have a shift where instead they have shows about powerful women who “have it all.” A new movie, “I Don’t Know How She Does It,” focuses on a strong woman who manages to create a balanced life while still doing everything she desires (including have a successful career and a husband and children). Movies like this should be the new “norm” rather than the others that I have mentioned.  In a world where media is available in all forms (Internet, print, broadcast, etc.), minds are molded from a young age.  By changing the messages in the media, it would change the actions and viewpoints in society from the bottom-up.

The second wave of feminism is one of the most influential out of all three.  While the first wave resulted in a significant legal victory, the second wave had more of a social impact. Much of the stigma of being a “feminist” resulted from the radical women in this movement that protested traditional values and burned their bras in front of reporters.  Women in 2011 are afraid that they’ll be classified as “raging liberal feminists” if they participate in a current movement or advocate the ideals of one.  When they think of feminism there is an association with other “ism’s” all of which are negative; racism, communism, sexism, etc. so they are less likely to participate or be open to hearing the general beliefs (Finkbeiner 2004).  However, these women that were radicals did incorporate a few positive elements into the movement that should be resurrected now.  They believed in empowerment with numbers.  That is truly one of the problems now, only a small amount of women are angry enough to do something and get involved. In the late 1960s women were not only angry about the dissatisfaction that they got from their “careers” in the household but also the headway that other minority groups were making.  The Civil Rights Act was passed and African American’s were slowly gaining equality while women were still stuck in the same spot.  This anger fired them up to do something about it. Modern women need to be relayed the information about the inequality in salary and within the workplace, socially, as well as the notion that women are still solely given the domestic responsibility. This is enough to get me angry, so why aren’t others in my generation working to do something about it? We need to embrace other women and band together to truly start a movement towards equality.

Although there are still remnants of the third wave of feminism present in society, they need to disban and join the fourth movement that I am proposing.  These “grrls” did a great job of integrating other movements where interests overlapped.  They reached out to the gay community and saw that there was a need for equality there as well.  Many of the women that are advocating for women’s equality also believe in homosexual rights so they wanted to join forces.  It is important for people in other movements that may believe in women’s equality as well to realize that they do not have to give up that loyalty when they help the women’s movement. This is smart because the more people that participate and advocate for equal rights, the more prevalent the message becomes.  The more people that talk about it, the quicker the message disseminates throughout society.  As mentioned before, there is empowerment in numbers. It is much easier for people in power to shut down an idea when there are only a few people advocating for it but it’s much harder when everyone’s constituency is asking for the same thing.  The third waver’s also utilized technology by creating cyberfeminism to create a community of supporters.  With popular social media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter there should be a utilization of this “new” technology.  Social media is a way to connect with people on the large scale and spread the message. Many nonprofits have created entire departments for social media outreach, so why shouldn’t our new wave of feminism take to the computer and spread our message as well?

Once this cultural revolution takes place, there will be room for effective legislation.  Without a change in the way that people view gender roles and women’s equality changes, any legislation will be useless.  Yes, there may be a law that outlaws discrimination in the work place but it still happens all the time just because of people’s inherent views that women should be in the home and they can’t do things as well as men.  The climate needs to be favorable in order for politicians to feel comfortable passing legislation.  If their constituents don’t believe it then they won’t either (even if they personally do, they politically won’t).

I truly believe that we have made some headway in the realm of women’s rights since the days of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony. These women would have never guessed that women such as Hillary Clinton and Michelle Bachmann would ever be running for president or much less be in the United States House of Representatives and Senate.  With my proposed cultural change, and later legislation to back it up, I truly believe that one-day women will get equal pay for equal work.  Someday, the United States will follow suit to countries such as Germany, that have elected women as heads of state. If we start now, I know that in my lifetime there will be significant change in the way of women’s equality and the days of unequal pay and skewed responsibility in the household will be unimaginable.

Faludi, Susan. Backlash. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press, 1991. Print.

Friedan, Betty. The Feminine Mystique. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company Inc., 1963. Print.

Krolokke, Charlotte. “Three Waves of Feminism.” Gender Communication Theories and Analyses. Sagepub. Web. 27 Sept 2011.

Romano, Andrew and Tony Dokoupil. “Mens Lib.” The Daily Beast, Sep 20 2010 Web. 27 Sept 2011.

Rowe-Finkbeiner, Kristin. The F Word: Feminism in Jeopardy. Emeryville, CA:  Seal Press, 2004. Print.

The Alice Paul Institute. The Equal Rights Amendment. Web. 7 Oct 2011.

Total Frat Move. 6 Oct 2011. Web. 7 Oct 2011.

“Women’s Earnings and Income” catalyst.org. Catalyst, April 2011. Web. 27 Sept 2011.

A War on Women

In my last post, I discussed Michelle Bachmann’s support to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. The bill was first introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) to stop the funding of Title X programs. While the bill doesn’t explicitly state that funding for Planned Parenthood is being attacked, Rep. Pence has made it quite clear in speeches that the bill is aimed at the organization (it receives a large portion of Title X funding). Unfortunately, this is only one prong of the “war on women.”

Emily’s List, an organization that works to elect pro-choice Democratic women into Congress, has actively been e-mailing their supporters to sign a petition to stop said war. I’ve received about five e-mails just in the past two days asking me to sign a petition telling the Republican’s “NO.”  Emily’s List has partnered with moveon.org Political Action to protect women and these e-mails are part of this campaign.

Some of these attacks include redefining rape, a proposed law in South Dakota that would make it legal to murder doctors that perform abortions, and a push to cut all funds from the only federal family planning in the country. These are just a few of the programs that exclusively target women. They’re even proposing to cut $1 billion in funding for Head Start.  Head Start is a program that allows low-income children to go to pre-school, when otherwise their families wouldn’t have the funds to send them since there aren’t any public pre-schools. This $1 billion would result in over 200, 000 children losing their spots. Some of you may be saying that these are pretty bold claims, where’s the evidence? The “Stop War on Women” website cites at least one source for every claim. In this particular blog post I would like to focus on the cut of Title X funding, the redefinition of rape, and the decrease in funding for Head Start.

Title X Funding: Emily at Gipper’s Chutzpah questioned my claim a couple of weeks ago that Planned Parenthood was a vital resource for low income women. I firmly stand by my belief that Planned Parenthood clinics essential. Not only are they extremely accesible but they provide services to these women that they would never get otherwise. While Planned Parenthood is widely known for their abortion services, that is hardly the only service they provide. They provide STD screenings, birth control, and cervical cancer testing (just to name a few). Without funding, the clinics couldn’t perform these services and many women would be living with undiagnosed STD’s as well as cervical cancer. Cervical cancer is easily treatable when caught early enough but without a convenient and inexpensive place to get this service, that is virtually impossible. By funding Planned Parenthood, unnecessary deaths are being avoided. Here is a video that shows how important this issue really is:

When there’s question regarding funding and it’s a matter of life and death, I personally always err on the side of life. In this case, cutting the funding for Planned Parenthood is leading thousands of women towards death without any remorse.

Redefinition of rape: A Republican state legislator in Georgia wants to change the legal term for victims of rape, domestic violence, and stalking to “accuser.”  I find this absolutely appalling since it implies that the woman is making up the charge and decreases the seriousness of the matter. Rape, stalking, and domestic violence are all issues that can severely injure women not only physically but also mentally temporarily or in many cases, permanently.  By changing the term to “accuser” it will deter women from pressing charges against the other party.  Pressing charges is already a difficult thing for extremely vulnerable women in these situations and by placing another stigma to it, it will not help.  Instead it will force these women to stay in the shadows and not get the help that they need. Not only will it hurt the women who are victims but it will also indirectly hurt all women. It means that these predators are still on the streets and what is going to stop them from committing the crime again since they didn’t get caught in the first place? This essentially is taking away the only thing that women in this situation may feel like they still own– their voice.

Cutting funding for Head Start: By slashing fundingfor this important program, it not only affects women but their children as well. Head Start gives aid to low income families so that their children can go to pre-school.With children in pre-school, more women have the opportunity to work and have a career. Their children are in good hands and they don’t have to worry about paying for daycare while they try to make a living. Pre-school is a vital part to children’s education because it sets the foundation for the rest of their life. Pre-school is not only where they learn how to hold a crayon correctly but also where they learn to interact and cooperate with others.  Essential socializing skills are acquired when you have to share the swing set or building blocks with one of your classmates. So not only would this cut in funding hinder women from working during the day because they don’t have enough money to find someone to take care of their child but it also sets back the children. These children will be lightyears behind their peers when they enter kindergarten.

Once again, what’s disturbing is that these are only three of the issues that are being attacked by the GOP. As human beings I urge all of you to head over to “Stop the War on Women” and sign the petition against these proposals. These are not just women’s issues, but human right’s issue. Join the fight with these amazing U.S. senators and protect America’s women.

Bachmann: Patching up the cracks in the glass ceiling

The presidential race of 2008 started earlier than any race I can remember.  I think people started to declare their candidacy the day that George W. Bush won the election in 2004. The next four years were filled with speculations about who would win the nomination for both sides.  Once it got closer to the actual election (say 2007), there were a handful of candidates on both sides. Do you guys remember this picture from the first debate in New Hampshire?

What’s the first thing that sticks out to you? Is it that figure in the grey suit? Hillary Clinton distinctly sticks out, not only because she is in a shiny grey suit in a sea of black, but also because she is the only woman.  Clinton made history by making it to the final round of the primaries before ultimately loosing the nomination to now President Barack Obama. Fifty years ago, even twenty years ago, no one could have imagined the day where a woman beat out her male counterparts in several state primary elections. In her concession speech, she mentioned the barriers that still face women today, some of which are invisible and unconscious.  She refers to this as the toughest glass ceiling to crack but with her campaign she sure as hell made “18 million cracks in it.”

I can’t help but think that Michelle Bachmann (and Sarah Palin over the past two and a half years) has been patching up those cracks. Hillary Clinton worked hard and played hard when it came to competing with her male counterparts in the election.  She publicly fought for women to have equal pay, equal respect, and equal opportunities. The audacity and perseverance that she showed during the election allowed more people to respect the idea of having a woman in a position of such power. She inspired women throughout the country to follow their dreams and wanted to make it clear in her concession speech that just because she fell short of her goals did not indicate that anyone else would. These are the cracks that Hillary Clinton has made and these cracks are slowly being patched up as Michelle Bachmann continues to be a part of the 2012 Presidential Election.

It’s quite obvious that I do not agree with Michelle Bachmann’s politics whatsoever and the positions that she takes are working in the opposite direction that Clinton did. While Clinton advocated for policies that would help women, Bachmann is advocating policies that would set back women fifty years.  She has publicly stated that she would cut funding for Planned Parenthood, an organization that is vital for the health of women in low income areas.  Many people get caught up with the politics of abortion (an entirely separate issue) when it comes to Planned Parenthood but they also offer vital services such as STD and HIV/AIDS screening, free birth control, and the HPV vaccination.  Speaking of the HPV vaccination, it’s hard to go more than a few hours without hearing about Bachmann’s attacks on Rick Perry in regards to his mandate for teenage girls in Texas to get the Gardasil vaccine.  While Bachmann tries to make the point that Rick Perry was in on a scheme to help the pharmaceutical company, Merck, rake in millions of dollars through the mandate for the vaccine.  Surprisingly, I do agree with her point.  However, the mandate for teenage girls to get this vaccine would have prevented hundreds of thousands of girls from contracting several strains of the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV). I don’t think that girl’s lives should be put in jeopardy just because people don’t like the idea of mandate.  When the mandate is there to help better millions of lives, it just needs to be done.I find it offensive that she used the example of a girl suffering from retardation due to the vaccine when there have been several governmental studies that have concluded that this is not possible.  The fact that she used evidence that is not even true contributes to the idea that some people still have about women.  She needs to be able to provide sound facts and reasoning when backing up her issues to show the world that women are just as smart, if not smarter, than men. I hope that in the coming months she can build up respect as a female politician and keep cracking the glass ceiling so that one day it truly is broken.

Maya Angelou: An Unconventional Intellectual

When someone says the word “intellectual”, the first thing that comes to mind is a person of privilege that has been educated at some of the best universities that the world has to offer. Hardly anyone would think to consider an African American woman who was mute for five years of her life, had a child out of wedlock right after graduating from high school, and worked low-end jobs to make ends meet before coming a writer.  However, this is the life of Dr. Maya Angelou.  Some may ask, “How does someone with these qualifications meet the expectations of an intellectual?”  The answer to this question has a simple and a complex answer.  The simple answer being that Dr. Angelou has received numerous honorary doctorate degrees (one of which was from the University of Southern California in 1985) and President Bill Clinton named her the first African American female Poet Laureate (and these are only a few of her many awards). The complex answer is what not only this post centers around but also the major point of Stephen Mack’s article “The Decline of the Public Intellectual”: her ability to offer fearless critique that is backed by intelligence.

Maya Angelou, born as Marguerite Ann Johnson, is a woman who has defied all odds from the minute that she was born as an African American woman in 1928.  In her world-renowned novel, “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,” she discusses how cuddling with her mother’s boyfriend turned into him raping her at the young age of seven years old. She confided in her older brother only for him to spread the story to the entire family. The boyfriend was found guilty for the crime but only served one day in jail.  Less than a few days after his release he was found beaten to death by Angelou’s uncles. For the next five years she did not speak to anyone because she thought that her voice and spoken word killed him. She was afraid of the power that she held with her voice and wanted to prevent anything else from happening. She then buried herself in literature written by prominent African Americans such as Langston Hughes and W.E.B. DuBois.  She developed a love for language and that love has continued throughout her life.  At the age of twelve, an educated black woman (a rarity in 1940), Mrs. Flowers, explained to her the importance of the spoken word and how much could be accomplished by using the voice. With the influence of Mrs. Flowers, Angelou rediscovered her voice and she would never let it be taken away again.  It was at this moment that Angelou established her pathway to becoming an intellectual.

That defining moment in Dr. Angelou’s life led her towards a lifetime of breaking down barriers that stood in front of her.  Despite having her son only a few weeks after graduating from high school, became the first female African American cable car driver in San Francisco.  At the age of eighteen she was already defying the roles that society had imposed upon women and African Americans; they only belonged in the home and were inferior.  A few years later she moved to New York City and joined the Harlem Writers Guild where she was given the opportunity to hear Dr. Martin Luther King speak.  She was inspired by his call for equality for black and whites in a highly segregated country.  Angelou was then asked to be the northern coordinator for Dr. King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference.  Despite her gender, she was not afraid to stand up for what she thought was right and express her very strong opinion to the world even though it was a rarity.  She truly embodied one of the essential qualities of a public intellectual: sharing critiques on critical affairs and backing it up with her own expertise.  As an African American woman herself, she was discriminated against as a young girl in Stamps, Arkansas and far after that as well.  She truly believed (and still believes) in the cause, which helped build her motivation to bring awareness and inspire both white and black people to stand up for racial equality despite harsh odds.

Dr. Angelou’s critique did not end with that of segregation and racial inequality.  Through her autobiographies and poetry, she critiques the ills of society by sharing her own experiences.  She has a unique writing style in her autobiographies by using narratives that are usually utilized solely in fiction-based writing (i.e. creating a character for herself instead of writing in the first person) that allows her audience to relate with her. An overarching theme of her criticism, not only in her works but also in speeches, has been social equality. She uses her own experiences throughout life to show how she coped with being a black woman in a predominantly white society.  She used the metaphor of a caged bird, in her first novel “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,” to represent herself and her personal struggles to shine while essentially being caged by racism.  Her ability to continue to “sing” and beat the oppression that was bestowed upon her serves as an inspiration to her readers.  Angelou has continued this sentiment throughout her writing career, but more specifically with the poem “Still I Rise” (see this YouTube video of her powerful reciting the poem). One of the most powerful verses serves as words of wisdom and inspiration for anyone in the world that has faced roadblocks to success:

“You may shoot me with your words/You may cut me with your eyes/You may kill me with your hatefulness,/But still, like air, I’ll rise.”

Dr. Angelou is able to take a step back from her criticism and instead of taking it personally she is empowered by it.  The criticism is what keeps her going and inspires her to continue to point out the ills of society and make a point to fix them instead of settle for the status quo.

A public intellectual is one that can fully write and express their viewpoints to others while properly backing them up.  Public intellectuals are not always activists but Dr. Angelou is able to wear both hats; she writes about social equality but she also actively fights for it.  Her history in the Black Civil Rights movement in the late 1950s and 1960s displays this but even in her older age she has continued to fight, she has not let that fire wane.  She has actively fought for this millennium’s civil rights movement: same-sex marriage rights.  Her continued passion for social fairness, a visible theme in all of her writings, led her to tirelessly call state senators in New York in 2009 to urge them to vote favorably on a same-sex marriage bill.  She states,

“Society made gay relationships hard enough without the added burden of making marriage illegal. To love someone takes a lot of courage. So how much more is one challenged when the love is of the same sex and the laws say, ‘I forbid you from loving this person?’”

Dr. Angelou has never been afraid of social stigmas that society has placed on certain concepts, such as being gay. Even though homosexuality has slowly become more widely accepted in society there still exists a lot of discrimination and hate around the subject.  Several decades ago, women faced similar discrimination with notions that women should be submissive and stay in the home.  Just like Dr. Angelou rose above the notions and created a voice for herself, she is trying to allow for the same thing to happen with same-sex marriage. Today, she still does not let authority or the hierarchies of power get in her way.  She had the audacity to call several public officials who hold the power to say “yes” or “no” to the legality of same-sex marriage and bestow her strong opinions of the subject.  She frequently references this quote by Terrence:

“I am a human being. Nothing human can be alien to me”

as evidence to why humans should treat everyone equally. She helps to point out that we are all of the same species and scientifically equal so it would only be natural that socially we should be as well. Again, this displays the way that she acts on her opinions and backs them up with strong and developed reasoning, which makes her role as a public intellectual an influential one by giving her credibility to the population that she speaks to.

One thing that I find extremely important to note is that while Dr. Angelou bestows her opinion on the public, she is not arrogant and imposing about it.  She empathizes with her audience and knows that it is not easy to rise above the hate and oppression.  It can be daunting to act out against something that is seen as “set in stone.” She wants people to know that they are not alone and that someone has always been in the place that they may find themselves. In a recent speaking engagement at the University of Southern California, as written about in this Neon Tommy article, Dr. Angelou kept emphasizing the notion that “somebody was here before you.” She reminds us that even at our loneliest and most isolating moments, we need to forge ahead and make our actions count.

“You need to know, someone cried before you. Someone was lonely before you, misunderstood before you.”

Without explicitly saying it, I believe that Dr. Angelou is criticizing the “Me Generation” as spoken about by Ross Douthat from the New York Times . This is the generation where everything is about “me” and people are very self-centered. They forget to think of the world around then and how their actions will affect others. People think solely about themselves and think that they are the only ones who have to deal with a certain situation or an outcome will only affect them. She reminds us that everyone suffers and everyone faces difficulties so it’s important to find comfort and empowerment in that.  We need to use that comradery to empower us to overcome the suffering and barriers no matter what they may be.  There is no time to feel sorry for yourself or anyone else because that is time wasted that could be spent making a difference.  As a true public intellectual does, she uses her critique to make a point.  Her critique serves as her way of showing the “Me Generation” the problem that they have and then she tries to motivate them to fix it. Dr. Angelou uses herself as an example to do just that.  She was faced with racism but instead of feeling sorry for herself and accepting her given place in society, she saw that others were facing the same problems and her ancestors before her fought so she had to as well.  While Angelou does make the point of recognizing the past and those that came before us, she also makes it clear that there are exceptions and they do not always know what is best.

“Upon the moment you feel the most unstable you can find courage.  You have to have the courage to say ‘I beg your pardon?’”

This statement truly solidifies Dr. Maya Angelou’s position as a public intellectual in today’s society.  She is not afraid to step back from reality and look at the world with a wider lens.  She is able to see situations and how they line up in the grand scheme of things and from that she can properly offer her opinion. If someone says something that is backed up with flawed evidence or is not properly thought through, Dr. Angelou encourages us to ask for more explanation until the person is forced to provide adequate explanation and reasoning. Even if something is said by someone that is more established or has a “higher” status in society, it is still okay to question them.

As an eighty three year old African American woman, Dr. Maya Angelou has accomplished a large amount from being a Poet Laureate to receiving the Medal of Freedom from President Barack Obama.  Her public presence through her autobiographies, poetry, and speeches provide a springboard for society to jump off of.  She inspires us to break down barriers that are in place and to always continue to fight for social equality no matter what.  She continues to bring public light to injustice and force public officials to respond, as seen with her phone calls to state senators in New York regarding same-sex marriage.  She embodies the true definition of the public intellectual and continues to contribute to the world despite her old age, something that everyone can aspire to do one day. She truly is the “rainbow in the clouds” (a reference Angelou often makes to Genesis and God putting a rainbow in the clouds after continuous rain pour), a mentor for us all, someone to look towards for hope and inspiration in a world that at times can seem lonely and hopeless.

The Hillary Question

As we inch closer to the highly anticipated 2012 election (at the DNC they even went as far to include in the daily e-mail the exact days until the election), people have started to pose the question we’ve heard many times before: Will Hillary Clinton seek the 2012 Democratic Presidential nomination?

I, along with many other Democrats, thought that it was set in stone that Barack Obama would be the nominee for 2012.  More often than not, the incumbent is not challenged for the nomination and if they are it is hardly ever successful. The Los Angeles Times article by Andrew Malcolm, “She’s baack! Hillary Clinton questions return to Obama White House”, discusses the possibilites of Clinton’s departure from the State Department to focus on campaigning efforts.

Not only has there been speculation that Clinton may run for the office herself, but sources are speculating that President Obama may take Vice President Joseph Biden off of the ticket and replace him with Hillary Clinton.  In my opinion, this is quite far fetched as Vice President Biden brings experience to the White House that President Obama does not have and appeals to many demographics.  During my summer internship at the DNC, there was never a doubt in anyone’s mind that Joe Biden would remain on the ticket as the Vice Presidential ticket.  If anything, the DNC would fight to keep him on the ticket because provides great quotes for future merchandise.  In addition, the President and the Vice President seem to have a strong friendship that would be compromised by Biden’s dismissal from the ticket.

Despite the small chance that Hillary Clinton would become the presidential candidate or much less the vice presidential candidate, I can see why some people may think it would be beneficial for the Democratic Party.  President Obama’s job approval is hovering around 39% and adding a woman onto the ticket might help him regain supporters that he may have lost throughout the course of this three year term.  Many fundraisers are concerned that Obama is losing his support in both California and New York, states that Hillary Clinton could help him win.

There’s no question about it, Hillary Clinton would serve as a great Vice President or even President but I do not think it’s in the cards for her in 2012.  She has stated that she will not run for public office again and I think that might be best for her.  As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has accomplished so much and I would hate for her term to be cut short. She has finally found her niche and she is out of her husbands shadow so it’s not her time to truly shine.