26. Modern Women
|
In modern history women’s roles remain complex. Women’s identities are shaped by themselves as individuals, within their families, and in their public lives. This chapter discusses women's history in politics.
|
Conservative Opposition:
The 1980s witnessed a significant resistance to the gains and new challenges brought by feminism. Conservative women emerged as anti-feminists, attacking feminism while carving out careers and names for themselves. Figures like Phyllis Schlafly and Beverly LaHaye gained power by telling women to stay inside the house. Schlafly’s fierce opposition to the ERA and to women’s rights in general, along with her savvy political maneuvering helped to defeat ratification by the states of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) that had been passed by Congress in 1972. Without the ERA, progress for women depended to a great extent on the rulings of the US Supreme Court decisions, which could be reversed by later courts.
Conservative politicians of this era were anti-abortion, including Ronald Reagan. They also promoted what Reagan called trickle down economics, in which tax breaks for the wealthy are expected to contribute to economic benefits for working people. This would remove the government from assuming responsibility for providing these resources. Unfortunately, those benefits never trickled down far enough to reach the people they were supposed to help. For women this meant that tax breaks which would have helped poor mothers and children, access to vital healthcare, and other issues important to women remained distant.
One of the main targets of this conservative approach to government spending was the “welfare mother,” or “welfare queen.” The image of the "welfare queen" popularized by President Reagan was typically a Black woman collecting welfare checks to feed her many children. She was portrayed as idle, relying on taxpayers' money instead of holding down a job. She was said to have given birth to many children in order to collect more benefits and thus “game the system.”. Many consider this a coded message that subtly taps into racial fears and hides conscious or unconscious racism.
In his speeches, Ronald Reagan never mentioned a specific woman, but he used the term to promote his economic agenda and decrease government spending. Reagan was actually describing a real woman: Linda Taylor. Taylor was a real woman who actually did cheat the government out of large sums of money. She also married many men at the same time. Taylor used a total of 33 known fake names, and she employed many wigs to aid her expert disguises.
The 1980s witnessed a significant resistance to the gains and new challenges brought by feminism. Conservative women emerged as anti-feminists, attacking feminism while carving out careers and names for themselves. Figures like Phyllis Schlafly and Beverly LaHaye gained power by telling women to stay inside the house. Schlafly’s fierce opposition to the ERA and to women’s rights in general, along with her savvy political maneuvering helped to defeat ratification by the states of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) that had been passed by Congress in 1972. Without the ERA, progress for women depended to a great extent on the rulings of the US Supreme Court decisions, which could be reversed by later courts.
Conservative politicians of this era were anti-abortion, including Ronald Reagan. They also promoted what Reagan called trickle down economics, in which tax breaks for the wealthy are expected to contribute to economic benefits for working people. This would remove the government from assuming responsibility for providing these resources. Unfortunately, those benefits never trickled down far enough to reach the people they were supposed to help. For women this meant that tax breaks which would have helped poor mothers and children, access to vital healthcare, and other issues important to women remained distant.
One of the main targets of this conservative approach to government spending was the “welfare mother,” or “welfare queen.” The image of the "welfare queen" popularized by President Reagan was typically a Black woman collecting welfare checks to feed her many children. She was portrayed as idle, relying on taxpayers' money instead of holding down a job. She was said to have given birth to many children in order to collect more benefits and thus “game the system.”. Many consider this a coded message that subtly taps into racial fears and hides conscious or unconscious racism.
In his speeches, Ronald Reagan never mentioned a specific woman, but he used the term to promote his economic agenda and decrease government spending. Reagan was actually describing a real woman: Linda Taylor. Taylor was a real woman who actually did cheat the government out of large sums of money. She also married many men at the same time. Taylor used a total of 33 known fake names, and she employed many wigs to aid her expert disguises.
The trope of the welfare queen contributed to racial stereotypes that already existed in society. To the Conservative right, Linda Taylor represented everything that was wrong with government programs. Conservatives believed that programs created by the civil rights and feminist movements had astronomically high fraud rates.
First Lady, Nancy Reagan, a powerful and influential woman, embodied this conservative, anti-feminist backlash. She projected an image of being a contented wife who gave up her acting career to support her husband's career, rejecting the ideals of feminist writing and activism. She refused public credit for her actions, projecting an image of a contented wife who gave up her acting career to support her husband's political ambitions.
Betty Friedan, author of The Feminine Mystique referred to Reagan as "an anachronism" who denied "the reality of American women today and what they want to be." Reagan's rhetoric exploited the pro-choice movement's language to undermine feminism, stating that "Feminism is the ability to choose what you want to do." Her statements made feminism seem frivolous and perpetuated the idea that women made choices in a vacuum, unaffected by the pressures society placed on women that constrained their choices.
Reagan's relentless adoration of her husband and her vocal belief that wives should serve their husbands positioned her as a symbol of what the religious right thought women should be: dutiful housewives who influence the world through their husbands and not for themselves. This resonated with religious conservatives at the time, who sought to uphold traditional gender roles and undo feminist progress.
Despite Reagan's mixed legacy on other issues, her brand of anti-feminism may be her most enduring legacy, and continues to fuel conservative arguments against feminism.
Ronald Reagan did deviate from his anti-government intervention on one issue important to women: drunk driving. Candace "Candy" Lightner founded Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) in 1980 after her daughter Cari had been killed by a drunk driver with previous drunk driving records. MADD's goals at the time included making it easier to obtain DUI convictions and raising the drinking age, which was 18 at the time and the leading cause of teenage death. In states where the drinking age was 21, there was a 26% reduction in vehicle fatalities among 19 and 20 year olds. MADD impacted how the public views drunk driving, humanizing the victims by sharing their stories to emphasize that these incidents are not mere "accidents" but rather instances of preventable violence. It worked to dispel the notion that the crime is "victimless." Under political pressure from Lightner, Reagan appointed a Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving.” Lightner wanted Reagan to put greater pressure on states to raise the drinking age and urged Reagan to use his political might. He eventually threatened to withhold 5% of funding support for interstate highways if states didn’t comply. It was a decidedly pro-big government position for an anti-big government president to take.
First Lady, Nancy Reagan, a powerful and influential woman, embodied this conservative, anti-feminist backlash. She projected an image of being a contented wife who gave up her acting career to support her husband's career, rejecting the ideals of feminist writing and activism. She refused public credit for her actions, projecting an image of a contented wife who gave up her acting career to support her husband's political ambitions.
Betty Friedan, author of The Feminine Mystique referred to Reagan as "an anachronism" who denied "the reality of American women today and what they want to be." Reagan's rhetoric exploited the pro-choice movement's language to undermine feminism, stating that "Feminism is the ability to choose what you want to do." Her statements made feminism seem frivolous and perpetuated the idea that women made choices in a vacuum, unaffected by the pressures society placed on women that constrained their choices.
Reagan's relentless adoration of her husband and her vocal belief that wives should serve their husbands positioned her as a symbol of what the religious right thought women should be: dutiful housewives who influence the world through their husbands and not for themselves. This resonated with religious conservatives at the time, who sought to uphold traditional gender roles and undo feminist progress.
Despite Reagan's mixed legacy on other issues, her brand of anti-feminism may be her most enduring legacy, and continues to fuel conservative arguments against feminism.
Ronald Reagan did deviate from his anti-government intervention on one issue important to women: drunk driving. Candace "Candy" Lightner founded Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) in 1980 after her daughter Cari had been killed by a drunk driver with previous drunk driving records. MADD's goals at the time included making it easier to obtain DUI convictions and raising the drinking age, which was 18 at the time and the leading cause of teenage death. In states where the drinking age was 21, there was a 26% reduction in vehicle fatalities among 19 and 20 year olds. MADD impacted how the public views drunk driving, humanizing the victims by sharing their stories to emphasize that these incidents are not mere "accidents" but rather instances of preventable violence. It worked to dispel the notion that the crime is "victimless." Under political pressure from Lightner, Reagan appointed a Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving.” Lightner wanted Reagan to put greater pressure on states to raise the drinking age and urged Reagan to use his political might. He eventually threatened to withhold 5% of funding support for interstate highways if states didn’t comply. It was a decidedly pro-big government position for an anti-big government president to take.
Women and Work:
Women joined the workforce in large numbers, thanks to the growing feminist movement as well as economic necessity. One significant change was the increased pursuit of higher education by women. Between 1970 and 2019, the percentage of women aged 25 to 64 in the workforce holding a college degree increased fourfold, whereas the percentage of men with a college degree only slightly more than doubled during the same period.
In the 1980s, it was becoming more and more difficult for a family to maintain a middle-class lifestyle on only one salary, so women went to work to support their families, as they always have done. Although President Kennedy had signed the Equal Pay act into law in June of 1963, companies found ways to circumvent the intent of the law, which was to provide pay equity for women who do the same or equivalent jobs as men. The social norm of not openly discussing salaries was harmful to women, who accepted lower salaries without knowing their male peers made more. This happened to Lilly Ledbetter. Ledbetter was a former employee of Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, who discovered after years of service that she was earning significantly less than her male colleagues doing the same job. Her lawsuit against the company went to the Supreme Court, which ruled against her, citing the statute of limitations. Although it never helped her, in 2009, the Obama Administration and Congress passed the Lilly Ledbetter Equal Pay Act. The act extends the time frame for filing pay discrimination claims. It resets the statute of limitations with each paycheck affected by the discriminatory action, allowing employees to bring forward a complaint within 180 days of receiving a discriminatory paycheck.
Discrimination in the workplace continued, as women were denied paid maternity leave and the Supreme Court even ruled that if a woman took maternity leave, she was not guaranteed to be able to return to the job she left. In 1993, Congress finally passed the Family and Medical Leave Act that required government employers to give employees twelve weeks of unpaid maternity leave, that their insurance coverage continue through the leave period, and that they be able to resume their pre-pregnancy job. Many employers in other industries began to provide maternity leave and to provide leave for male parents who wish to take time to care for a child or support their female partner post-birth. Both men and women are eligible to take leave to care for ailing spouses, children, parents and other family members.
One of the major changes in the modern era is the number of women in positions of economic power. Many women in the twenty-first century have been named to head major corporations, and a few have become self-made billionaires. Female enrollment in law, business, and medical schools now meets or exceeds the number of men who are preparing for these careers, and women are also among the generation of start-up entrepreneurs who have introduced new ideas and new technologies into our world.
Getting women into corporate suites and board rooms allowed women to effect change down the corporate ladder. Since 1970, women have become more inclined to work full time and year-round. The participation of women with children in the labor force has also significantly risen. Furthermore, there has been a steady growth in women's earnings relative to men's earnings. In 1979, women working full time earned 62 percent of what men earned, while in 2019, that figure had increased to 82 percent. More recently, there has been a significant retirement wave among women in the baby-boom generation (those born between 1946 and 1964), leading to a decline in their labor force participation rate in the past decade or so.
Women joined the workforce in large numbers, thanks to the growing feminist movement as well as economic necessity. One significant change was the increased pursuit of higher education by women. Between 1970 and 2019, the percentage of women aged 25 to 64 in the workforce holding a college degree increased fourfold, whereas the percentage of men with a college degree only slightly more than doubled during the same period.
In the 1980s, it was becoming more and more difficult for a family to maintain a middle-class lifestyle on only one salary, so women went to work to support their families, as they always have done. Although President Kennedy had signed the Equal Pay act into law in June of 1963, companies found ways to circumvent the intent of the law, which was to provide pay equity for women who do the same or equivalent jobs as men. The social norm of not openly discussing salaries was harmful to women, who accepted lower salaries without knowing their male peers made more. This happened to Lilly Ledbetter. Ledbetter was a former employee of Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, who discovered after years of service that she was earning significantly less than her male colleagues doing the same job. Her lawsuit against the company went to the Supreme Court, which ruled against her, citing the statute of limitations. Although it never helped her, in 2009, the Obama Administration and Congress passed the Lilly Ledbetter Equal Pay Act. The act extends the time frame for filing pay discrimination claims. It resets the statute of limitations with each paycheck affected by the discriminatory action, allowing employees to bring forward a complaint within 180 days of receiving a discriminatory paycheck.
Discrimination in the workplace continued, as women were denied paid maternity leave and the Supreme Court even ruled that if a woman took maternity leave, she was not guaranteed to be able to return to the job she left. In 1993, Congress finally passed the Family and Medical Leave Act that required government employers to give employees twelve weeks of unpaid maternity leave, that their insurance coverage continue through the leave period, and that they be able to resume their pre-pregnancy job. Many employers in other industries began to provide maternity leave and to provide leave for male parents who wish to take time to care for a child or support their female partner post-birth. Both men and women are eligible to take leave to care for ailing spouses, children, parents and other family members.
One of the major changes in the modern era is the number of women in positions of economic power. Many women in the twenty-first century have been named to head major corporations, and a few have become self-made billionaires. Female enrollment in law, business, and medical schools now meets or exceeds the number of men who are preparing for these careers, and women are also among the generation of start-up entrepreneurs who have introduced new ideas and new technologies into our world.
Getting women into corporate suites and board rooms allowed women to effect change down the corporate ladder. Since 1970, women have become more inclined to work full time and year-round. The participation of women with children in the labor force has also significantly risen. Furthermore, there has been a steady growth in women's earnings relative to men's earnings. In 1979, women working full time earned 62 percent of what men earned, while in 2019, that figure had increased to 82 percent. More recently, there has been a significant retirement wave among women in the baby-boom generation (those born between 1946 and 1964), leading to a decline in their labor force participation rate in the past decade or so.
Women in Politics:
In order to change society for women, women were also needed wherever laws and decisions were being made. The first women in political positions sometimes got there by association with their husbands in power. Natalie Tayloe Ross won a special election to fill a vacancy caused by the death of her husband as Governor of Wyoming. Inaugurated fifteen days before Miriam Ferguson of Texas, Ross was the first woman sworn in as a US governor in 1925. Ferguson too was elected twice as a surrogate for her husband who could not run for re-election. In Alabama, Lurleen Wallace was also elected as a surrogate for her husband who could not run for re-election. It really wasn’t until 1975 that Ella T. Grasso was elected in her own right in Connecticut.
Women also worked their way into the Senate and House of Representatives in larger numbers. When Bella Abzug served in the House of Representatives from 1971-1977, she was called “Battling Bella” because of her unwavering support for civil rights, gay rights, and women’s rights. She often said, “A woman’ place is in the house–the House of Representatives.”
Margaret Chase Smith from Maine became the first woman elected to the Senate. Although others preceded her she was the first “elected,” as others had been appointed to serve. Since she had previously served in the House, she was the first to do both.
Shirley Chisholm was the first African-American to serve in the House. She faced both gender and race based discrimination her entire career in politics. In 1972 she campaigned for president during the Democratic primary. She was unfairly blocked by her male peers from participating in televised debates She took legal action but was only able to make a single speech. Even though she was unsuccessful, she raised hope that a future woman might occupy the White House.
By 1980, 22 women served in the House of Representatives and 2 were in the Senate. By the 1990s, those figures were about the same.
In order to change society for women, women were also needed wherever laws and decisions were being made. The first women in political positions sometimes got there by association with their husbands in power. Natalie Tayloe Ross won a special election to fill a vacancy caused by the death of her husband as Governor of Wyoming. Inaugurated fifteen days before Miriam Ferguson of Texas, Ross was the first woman sworn in as a US governor in 1925. Ferguson too was elected twice as a surrogate for her husband who could not run for re-election. In Alabama, Lurleen Wallace was also elected as a surrogate for her husband who could not run for re-election. It really wasn’t until 1975 that Ella T. Grasso was elected in her own right in Connecticut.
Women also worked their way into the Senate and House of Representatives in larger numbers. When Bella Abzug served in the House of Representatives from 1971-1977, she was called “Battling Bella” because of her unwavering support for civil rights, gay rights, and women’s rights. She often said, “A woman’ place is in the house–the House of Representatives.”
Margaret Chase Smith from Maine became the first woman elected to the Senate. Although others preceded her she was the first “elected,” as others had been appointed to serve. Since she had previously served in the House, she was the first to do both.
Shirley Chisholm was the first African-American to serve in the House. She faced both gender and race based discrimination her entire career in politics. In 1972 she campaigned for president during the Democratic primary. She was unfairly blocked by her male peers from participating in televised debates She took legal action but was only able to make a single speech. Even though she was unsuccessful, she raised hope that a future woman might occupy the White House.
By 1980, 22 women served in the House of Representatives and 2 were in the Senate. By the 1990s, those figures were about the same.
Feminism:
Despite the Reagans, the feminist movement in this period did not stop, it just became more mainstream. Instead of huge demonstrations by women, they integrated themselves into jobs, found work in nonprofits that did the work protesters were demanding in the decades prior. One of the remarkable aspects of feminism in the 1990s was that it was decidedly led by women of color. New organizations led by women of color like SONG, INCITE!, and Sister Song emerged. Southerners on New Ground (SONG) formed in 1993 to empower LGBTQ+ youth in the south. INCITE! formed to develop strategies to end violence against women.
Sister Song Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective was formed in 1997 by drawing together groups of women of color from Indigenous, Black, Latina, and Asian American communities. Their goal is to represent themselves and use their voices to advance the perspectives and needs of women of color. Sister Song embraced the idea of Reproductive Justice, that it wasn’t just about the freedom to NOT have children, but also access to the resources TO have children. SisterSong defines it as such: “the human right to maintain personal bodily autonomy, have children, not have children, and parent the children we have in safe and sustainable communities.”
However the trend of women of color taking the lead continued into the 21st century. In 2013, Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi, three Black women organizers founded #BlackLivesMatter (BLM) in response to the acquittal of Trayvon Martin’s murderer. BLM advocates for Black lives in the face of police and systemic racism. It particularly advocates for Black trans women, who face the largest threats to life. This movement defined much of the political landscape in the 2010s and into the 2020s. They advocated, proposed and endorsed policy changes, fundraised, and raised human consciousness.
Despite the Reagans, the feminist movement in this period did not stop, it just became more mainstream. Instead of huge demonstrations by women, they integrated themselves into jobs, found work in nonprofits that did the work protesters were demanding in the decades prior. One of the remarkable aspects of feminism in the 1990s was that it was decidedly led by women of color. New organizations led by women of color like SONG, INCITE!, and Sister Song emerged. Southerners on New Ground (SONG) formed in 1993 to empower LGBTQ+ youth in the south. INCITE! formed to develop strategies to end violence against women.
Sister Song Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective was formed in 1997 by drawing together groups of women of color from Indigenous, Black, Latina, and Asian American communities. Their goal is to represent themselves and use their voices to advance the perspectives and needs of women of color. Sister Song embraced the idea of Reproductive Justice, that it wasn’t just about the freedom to NOT have children, but also access to the resources TO have children. SisterSong defines it as such: “the human right to maintain personal bodily autonomy, have children, not have children, and parent the children we have in safe and sustainable communities.”
However the trend of women of color taking the lead continued into the 21st century. In 2013, Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi, three Black women organizers founded #BlackLivesMatter (BLM) in response to the acquittal of Trayvon Martin’s murderer. BLM advocates for Black lives in the face of police and systemic racism. It particularly advocates for Black trans women, who face the largest threats to life. This movement defined much of the political landscape in the 2010s and into the 2020s. They advocated, proposed and endorsed policy changes, fundraised, and raised human consciousness.
Women and the Court:
In 1981, President Regan appointed the first woman to serve on the Supreme Court: Sandra Day O’Connor. A centrist Republican, O’Conor sometimes pursued issues specific to women. For example, she helped repeal a 1913 Arizona statute prohibiting women from working more than eight hours a day on the theory that women should have an equal opportunity to pursue a living wage.
President Bill Clinton appointed the second female justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Barack Obama appointed Elana Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina justice on the Court and a strong voice for women’s rights. Ginsburg, a feminist, defended equal rights for both men and women as an attorney in the American Civil Liberties Union. One of her first cases involved a man who was denied a tax credit while he nursed his ailing mother. This tax break was only given to women because of expected gender norms. Ginsberg won the case and opened doors to challenge other laws that discriminated on the basis of sex. As a justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was in her golden age in the early 2000s. It was then she began writing famous dissents. A dissent is when a justice disagrees with the overall decision of the other justices and writes their legal argument and perspective for future generations to use.
Paralleling women’s progress at the top was a rising discontent over women’s lack of bodily autonomy, even in the era post Roe. Then Anita Hill happened. Hill was an attorney and academic who gained national attention in 1991 for her testimony during the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Hill accused Thomas, who was nominated by President George H. W. Bush, of sexual harassment during his tenure as her supervisor at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in the early 1980s. Her allegations included explicit and inappropriate comments, discussions about pornographic materials, and unwanted advances.
In 1981, President Regan appointed the first woman to serve on the Supreme Court: Sandra Day O’Connor. A centrist Republican, O’Conor sometimes pursued issues specific to women. For example, she helped repeal a 1913 Arizona statute prohibiting women from working more than eight hours a day on the theory that women should have an equal opportunity to pursue a living wage.
President Bill Clinton appointed the second female justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Barack Obama appointed Elana Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina justice on the Court and a strong voice for women’s rights. Ginsburg, a feminist, defended equal rights for both men and women as an attorney in the American Civil Liberties Union. One of her first cases involved a man who was denied a tax credit while he nursed his ailing mother. This tax break was only given to women because of expected gender norms. Ginsberg won the case and opened doors to challenge other laws that discriminated on the basis of sex. As a justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was in her golden age in the early 2000s. It was then she began writing famous dissents. A dissent is when a justice disagrees with the overall decision of the other justices and writes their legal argument and perspective for future generations to use.
Paralleling women’s progress at the top was a rising discontent over women’s lack of bodily autonomy, even in the era post Roe. Then Anita Hill happened. Hill was an attorney and academic who gained national attention in 1991 for her testimony during the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Hill accused Thomas, who was nominated by President George H. W. Bush, of sexual harassment during his tenure as her supervisor at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in the early 1980s. Her allegations included explicit and inappropriate comments, discussions about pornographic materials, and unwanted advances.
Hill's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee brought issues of sexual harassment and workplace misconduct into the national spotlight. It sparked a significant national conversation about gender, power dynamics, and the treatment of women in the workplace. Hill faced intense scrutiny and criticism during the hearings, but her courage in coming forward with her allegations inspired and empowered many women to share their own experiences.
Although Thomas was ultimately confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice, Hill's testimony brought important attention to the issue of sexual harassment and led to significant changes in workplace policies and public discourse around these issues.
In one of the most controversial appointments to the Supreme Court in recent decades, President Donald Trump forced the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett through Congress just a few weeks before the 2020 presidential election. A strong opponent of abortion, Coney Barrett had told the Senate Judiciary hearing prior to her appointment that she respected legal precedent. This was shown to be untrue when the Supreme Court gave its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson.
Although Thomas was ultimately confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice, Hill's testimony brought important attention to the issue of sexual harassment and led to significant changes in workplace policies and public discourse around these issues.
In one of the most controversial appointments to the Supreme Court in recent decades, President Donald Trump forced the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett through Congress just a few weeks before the 2020 presidential election. A strong opponent of abortion, Coney Barrett had told the Senate Judiciary hearing prior to her appointment that she respected legal precedent. This was shown to be untrue when the Supreme Court gave its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson.
More Women in the Executive:
Women also began to find positions in the executive branch, both in the cabinet and in various government agencies that administer laws and policies. The first woman to hold a cabinet position was Frances Perkins as Secretary of Labor under President Franklin Roosevelt during the great depression. She helped to convince Congress to pass FDR’s many laws intended to provide assistance during an economic calamity.
By the 1980s only a handful of other women had had the honor of being the “token” woman and almost always in less prestigious roles in the presidential cabinet. President Carter named four women to his cabinet and Reagan and Bush followed suit. Under Clinton the number of women in the cabinet expanded further, a trend that continued into the 21st century.
But no woman had yet served as vice president or even president. When Walter Mondale nominated Geraldine Ferraro of Queens, New York to be his vice presidential candidate, it seemed like a good opportunity for a woman to succeed in politics. Ferraro had served as a prosecutor and member of Congress, and her political credentials were excellent. She had proven that she could “play with the boys” and achieve positive goals for her constituents, particularly the women. Her campaign was derailed a bit by her husband's troubles with the Internal Revenue Service, but Ferraro was undeterred. In the end, she and Mondale were derailed by the conservative backlash that was sweeping the country. For many Americans, this was not the time for women’s rights or for putting a woman in the second highest office in the country. The Democratic ticket lost to incumbent Ronald Reagan by a wide margin.
Still women found their way into the executive cabinet. The first female Secretary of State in the US was Madeleine Albright. She served as the 64th Secretary of State from 1997 to 2001 under President Bill Clinton. Albright played a significant role in shaping US foreign policy during her tenure. Following her, President Bush also had a female Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. She was the first African American woman to hold that position. Prior to becoming Secretary of State, Rice served as National Security Advisor to President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2005. Rice's tenure as Secretary of State focused on issues such as democracy promotion, international development, and human rights. She traveled extensively, engaging in diplomacy and representing the US on the global stage. Rice also played a significant role in facilitating Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.
Women also began to find positions in the executive branch, both in the cabinet and in various government agencies that administer laws and policies. The first woman to hold a cabinet position was Frances Perkins as Secretary of Labor under President Franklin Roosevelt during the great depression. She helped to convince Congress to pass FDR’s many laws intended to provide assistance during an economic calamity.
By the 1980s only a handful of other women had had the honor of being the “token” woman and almost always in less prestigious roles in the presidential cabinet. President Carter named four women to his cabinet and Reagan and Bush followed suit. Under Clinton the number of women in the cabinet expanded further, a trend that continued into the 21st century.
But no woman had yet served as vice president or even president. When Walter Mondale nominated Geraldine Ferraro of Queens, New York to be his vice presidential candidate, it seemed like a good opportunity for a woman to succeed in politics. Ferraro had served as a prosecutor and member of Congress, and her political credentials were excellent. She had proven that she could “play with the boys” and achieve positive goals for her constituents, particularly the women. Her campaign was derailed a bit by her husband's troubles with the Internal Revenue Service, but Ferraro was undeterred. In the end, she and Mondale were derailed by the conservative backlash that was sweeping the country. For many Americans, this was not the time for women’s rights or for putting a woman in the second highest office in the country. The Democratic ticket lost to incumbent Ronald Reagan by a wide margin.
Still women found their way into the executive cabinet. The first female Secretary of State in the US was Madeleine Albright. She served as the 64th Secretary of State from 1997 to 2001 under President Bill Clinton. Albright played a significant role in shaping US foreign policy during her tenure. Following her, President Bush also had a female Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. She was the first African American woman to hold that position. Prior to becoming Secretary of State, Rice served as National Security Advisor to President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2005. Rice's tenure as Secretary of State focused on issues such as democracy promotion, international development, and human rights. She traveled extensively, engaging in diplomacy and representing the US on the global stage. Rice also played a significant role in facilitating Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.
Women and War:
In 1971, women represented 1 percent of the military. In 1981, that percentage rose to 8.5. Then, in 1990, the number of women in the military jumped with the latest US war: the Persian Gulf War against Iraq. One-term president George H.W. Bush declared war on Iraq after it invaded its oil rich neighbor, Kuwait, for control of the industry. This war was viewed positively by Americans, the first since WWII, and was his attempt to maintain Republican control of the White House. The war was a significant moment in American military history, as it saw the largest deployment of women to a combat zone up to that time. Over 40,000 female American soldiers served. In 1991, Congress also allowed women to fly warplanes in combat. Women who served in this conflict were mostly single, childless, college-educated, and in the Army.
Captain Rosemary Mariner led VAQ-34 during Operation Desert Storm and became the first woman to command an operational naval aviation squadron. Mariner had a master’s degree in National Security Strategy from the National War College and worked at the Pentagon. She served the US for 24 years with over 3,500 flight hours in 15 types of aircraft. She became a fierce advocate for women in the military and worked to overturn laws and regulations that limited women’s job prospects and kept women from combat. She said, "In modern warfare, the emphasis is not on physical strength, but on brain power operating sophisticated weapons systems. A machine gun is a great equalizer."
Soldiers from the Gulf War were more likely to die in accidents or from mental health on their return, than from combat itself. Women faced significant challenges in the military and healthcare systems, which were ill-equipped to meet their specific needs. They encountered chronic health conditions that were common among Gulf War veteransand expressed the need to be recognized as a distinct cohort with unique requirements. The Gulf War syndrome, or PTSD was studied following this war and they found that the way the illness manifests may differ between female and male veterans.The lack of preparedness within the Veterans Affairs (VA) to cater to women. Women soldiers captured by Iraqi forces faced torture and sexual assault, and some also experienced sexual assault from their male comrades-in-arms.
In 1971, women represented 1 percent of the military. In 1981, that percentage rose to 8.5. Then, in 1990, the number of women in the military jumped with the latest US war: the Persian Gulf War against Iraq. One-term president George H.W. Bush declared war on Iraq after it invaded its oil rich neighbor, Kuwait, for control of the industry. This war was viewed positively by Americans, the first since WWII, and was his attempt to maintain Republican control of the White House. The war was a significant moment in American military history, as it saw the largest deployment of women to a combat zone up to that time. Over 40,000 female American soldiers served. In 1991, Congress also allowed women to fly warplanes in combat. Women who served in this conflict were mostly single, childless, college-educated, and in the Army.
Captain Rosemary Mariner led VAQ-34 during Operation Desert Storm and became the first woman to command an operational naval aviation squadron. Mariner had a master’s degree in National Security Strategy from the National War College and worked at the Pentagon. She served the US for 24 years with over 3,500 flight hours in 15 types of aircraft. She became a fierce advocate for women in the military and worked to overturn laws and regulations that limited women’s job prospects and kept women from combat. She said, "In modern warfare, the emphasis is not on physical strength, but on brain power operating sophisticated weapons systems. A machine gun is a great equalizer."
Soldiers from the Gulf War were more likely to die in accidents or from mental health on their return, than from combat itself. Women faced significant challenges in the military and healthcare systems, which were ill-equipped to meet their specific needs. They encountered chronic health conditions that were common among Gulf War veteransand expressed the need to be recognized as a distinct cohort with unique requirements. The Gulf War syndrome, or PTSD was studied following this war and they found that the way the illness manifests may differ between female and male veterans.The lack of preparedness within the Veterans Affairs (VA) to cater to women. Women soldiers captured by Iraqi forces faced torture and sexual assault, and some also experienced sexual assault from their male comrades-in-arms.
Many Americans were motivated to fight and support the war due to Hussains violations of human and women’s rights as well as Islamophobia, a fear or misunderstanding of Islam. Yet the war fell short of resolving those issues. Just miles from Iraq’s capital, Baghdad. The US and their allies halted and left Saddam Hussein in power. After the war ended, Iraqi society saw a regression in women's and girls' status due to various factors, including political decisions by Hussein to use Islamic and tribal traditions for consolidation of power. Post-war sanctions from the UN were particularly harsh on women and children. However, an uprising by the Kurdish ethnic group in 1991 gave the Kurds some freedoms which allowed them to advance some women's rights.They formed the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq.
Tensions with extremists in the region mounted. Then on the morning of September 11, 2001, Betty Ann Ong boarded a routine flight out of Boston as head flight attendant. Ong was a dedicated professional. When she lost contact with the cockpit, she called her airline. The 23 minute recording of her voice describing the scenes onboard the flight are a reminder of how scary and yet unaware Americans were of the threat. Ong’s plane crashed into the Twin Tower at 8:46am beginning one of the most catastrophic days in American history.
A second plane hit the other Twin Tower at 9:03 am. Flights around the US were grounded. A third hit the Pentagon at 9:37 am carrying a group of school children. As many fled the burning buildings and smoke, firefighters and emergency responders rushed towards the scene. At 9:59 the South tower collapsed.
Another plane, Flight 93 was flying over Pennsylvania when passengers were able to retake the cockpit and crash the plane into a field preventing the plane from being used as a weapon. It’s unclear, but many suspected the plane was intended for the White House. Researchers have found that the people on that plane represented an incredibly tough compilation of people, including CeeCee Lyles who was a former cop and a flight attendant. She would have been prepared to storm the cockpit. The passengers were gathered in the back of the plane where they formulated a plan. Elizabeth Wainio was on the phone with her mom. Her last words were, “Mom, they’re rushing the cockpit. I’ve got to go. Bye."
Tensions with extremists in the region mounted. Then on the morning of September 11, 2001, Betty Ann Ong boarded a routine flight out of Boston as head flight attendant. Ong was a dedicated professional. When she lost contact with the cockpit, she called her airline. The 23 minute recording of her voice describing the scenes onboard the flight are a reminder of how scary and yet unaware Americans were of the threat. Ong’s plane crashed into the Twin Tower at 8:46am beginning one of the most catastrophic days in American history.
A second plane hit the other Twin Tower at 9:03 am. Flights around the US were grounded. A third hit the Pentagon at 9:37 am carrying a group of school children. As many fled the burning buildings and smoke, firefighters and emergency responders rushed towards the scene. At 9:59 the South tower collapsed.
Another plane, Flight 93 was flying over Pennsylvania when passengers were able to retake the cockpit and crash the plane into a field preventing the plane from being used as a weapon. It’s unclear, but many suspected the plane was intended for the White House. Researchers have found that the people on that plane represented an incredibly tough compilation of people, including CeeCee Lyles who was a former cop and a flight attendant. She would have been prepared to storm the cockpit. The passengers were gathered in the back of the plane where they formulated a plan. Elizabeth Wainio was on the phone with her mom. Her last words were, “Mom, they’re rushing the cockpit. I’ve got to go. Bye."
At 10:28am the North Tower fell. 2,977 Americans were dead while the world watched in horror.
War was not inevitable. Osama bin Laden and his extremist group, Al Qaeda, claimed responsibility for the attacks and went into hiding in the mountains of Afghanistan. Secretary of State, Condolezza Rice was one of the only women in the decision room in the aftermath of 9/11. She was whisked to a bunker for protection. She later recalled, a meeting about the US response at Camp David, and said, “something that I remember most about the Camp David meeting was when we put the map out on the table, you look at the map, you look at Afghanistan and you look where it is -- I think the color kind of drained from everybody's faces, because [of] the stories of British defeats in Afghanistan, and Soviet defeats in Afghanistan, not to mention the potential for instability in Pakistan. It sits there on the Iranian border. We have no relations with Iran. States like Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. I think everybody thought, "Of all of the places to have to fight a war, Afghanistan would not be our choice." But we didn't choose Afghanistan; Afghanistan chose us.”
Bush was prepared to go after any nation that harbored extremists, and despite little evidence, put Iraq on his list. In 2002, Women Against War was established by a collective of women from the Capital District who strongly believed in the necessity of taking a stand against the U.S. government's intention to engage in war with Iraq. Their impassioned plea for action garnered widespread support from hundreds of local women, all dedicated to raising their voices and opposing the forthcoming violence.
As America mourned, artists took to song. Some sang their patriotism, rallied Americans together, while others pushed for peace. Many split down party and gender lines with a significant urban and rural divide. The Dixie Chicks, a popular female country band from Texas, faced backlash from their country, rural fans after their lead stated that she didn’t support the war in Iraq and was ashamed Bush was from Texas. At that point they were the most popular female band in country music with two consecutive diamond-certified albums. The Dixie Chicks were boycotted across the US in a rise of extreme patriotism. Fans burned piles of their CDs in trash cans and set them on fire. The Dixie Chicks returned in 2006 with the song "Not Ready to Make Nice" which reflected on their frustration with their fans. The song hit the fourth position on the Billboard Hot 100 chart. The Dixie Chicks dropped the word Dixie from their name after the death of George Floyd in 2020.
9/11 rallied Americans together, but this also created rampant islamophobia. Muslims from the middle east had been immigrating in greater numbers in the later half of the 20th century. By 9/11 an estimated 1 million people had immigrated to the US from Muslim majority countries.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan opened up opportunities for women in military service. Notably, other women like Ann Dunwoody became the first female four star general in military history in 2008. Leigh Anne Hester became the first woman to earn a silver star in combat and the first woman in American history to be cited for valor in combat. During a supply convoy route scanning and clearing operation, Hester's squad encountered an attack from enemy insurgents. In response, Hester effectively guided her team and then engaged in direct combat on foot, resulting in the elimination of at least three insurgents. The intense confrontation ultimately led to the killing or injury of 33 insurgents, with one being captured, while all members of her unit survived.
War was not inevitable. Osama bin Laden and his extremist group, Al Qaeda, claimed responsibility for the attacks and went into hiding in the mountains of Afghanistan. Secretary of State, Condolezza Rice was one of the only women in the decision room in the aftermath of 9/11. She was whisked to a bunker for protection. She later recalled, a meeting about the US response at Camp David, and said, “something that I remember most about the Camp David meeting was when we put the map out on the table, you look at the map, you look at Afghanistan and you look where it is -- I think the color kind of drained from everybody's faces, because [of] the stories of British defeats in Afghanistan, and Soviet defeats in Afghanistan, not to mention the potential for instability in Pakistan. It sits there on the Iranian border. We have no relations with Iran. States like Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. I think everybody thought, "Of all of the places to have to fight a war, Afghanistan would not be our choice." But we didn't choose Afghanistan; Afghanistan chose us.”
Bush was prepared to go after any nation that harbored extremists, and despite little evidence, put Iraq on his list. In 2002, Women Against War was established by a collective of women from the Capital District who strongly believed in the necessity of taking a stand against the U.S. government's intention to engage in war with Iraq. Their impassioned plea for action garnered widespread support from hundreds of local women, all dedicated to raising their voices and opposing the forthcoming violence.
As America mourned, artists took to song. Some sang their patriotism, rallied Americans together, while others pushed for peace. Many split down party and gender lines with a significant urban and rural divide. The Dixie Chicks, a popular female country band from Texas, faced backlash from their country, rural fans after their lead stated that she didn’t support the war in Iraq and was ashamed Bush was from Texas. At that point they were the most popular female band in country music with two consecutive diamond-certified albums. The Dixie Chicks were boycotted across the US in a rise of extreme patriotism. Fans burned piles of their CDs in trash cans and set them on fire. The Dixie Chicks returned in 2006 with the song "Not Ready to Make Nice" which reflected on their frustration with their fans. The song hit the fourth position on the Billboard Hot 100 chart. The Dixie Chicks dropped the word Dixie from their name after the death of George Floyd in 2020.
9/11 rallied Americans together, but this also created rampant islamophobia. Muslims from the middle east had been immigrating in greater numbers in the later half of the 20th century. By 9/11 an estimated 1 million people had immigrated to the US from Muslim majority countries.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan opened up opportunities for women in military service. Notably, other women like Ann Dunwoody became the first female four star general in military history in 2008. Leigh Anne Hester became the first woman to earn a silver star in combat and the first woman in American history to be cited for valor in combat. During a supply convoy route scanning and clearing operation, Hester's squad encountered an attack from enemy insurgents. In response, Hester effectively guided her team and then engaged in direct combat on foot, resulting in the elimination of at least three insurgents. The intense confrontation ultimately led to the killing or injury of 33 insurgents, with one being captured, while all members of her unit survived.
Women in the Obama Era:
In 2008, after eight years of president George W. Bush and controversial wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that had no end in sight Sarah Palin of Alaska was selected to stand alongside a wildly popular, former Vietnam War POW Senator from Arizona, John McCain. As governor of Alaska Palin had executive experience to bring to the table. But she also made several missteps in their campaign that hurt the team election day. Palin’s campaign of faith and guns was a precursor to the rhetorical style of the Tea Party that brought radical conservatism to American politics starting in 2010. McCain and Palin were opposed by then Senator Barack Obama.
In Democratic primaries Obama won against the favorite: Hillary Clinton, former First Lady and then Senator from New York. Everyone had expected Clinton to win, but Obama came out of left field to win the nomination and the election. He was a charismatic politician and a natural leader. Respecting his rival’s experience and ability, he appointed Hillary Clinton Secretary of State, the third woman to hold the role.
In 2012, the state of New Hampshire made history as the first state have all five executive posts filled by women: Maggie Hasson became the second woman to serve as governor of the state, Jean Shaheen was then serving as senator, but was also the first female governor of New Hampshire, the former Attorney General, Kelly Ayote what is the republican senator for New Hampshire, and Annie, Kuster and Carol Shea Porter, represented the state in the house of representatives.
In 2013 the Secretary of Defense dropped the policy that excluded women from combat roles and fully integrated the Army which opened up a wave of new positions for women over the next few years. In the special forces, two women were the first to complete Ranger school. There was also a wave of first female graduates from other advanced schools in these years as well as the first female Marine infantry officer in 2017.
In 2008, after eight years of president George W. Bush and controversial wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that had no end in sight Sarah Palin of Alaska was selected to stand alongside a wildly popular, former Vietnam War POW Senator from Arizona, John McCain. As governor of Alaska Palin had executive experience to bring to the table. But she also made several missteps in their campaign that hurt the team election day. Palin’s campaign of faith and guns was a precursor to the rhetorical style of the Tea Party that brought radical conservatism to American politics starting in 2010. McCain and Palin were opposed by then Senator Barack Obama.
In Democratic primaries Obama won against the favorite: Hillary Clinton, former First Lady and then Senator from New York. Everyone had expected Clinton to win, but Obama came out of left field to win the nomination and the election. He was a charismatic politician and a natural leader. Respecting his rival’s experience and ability, he appointed Hillary Clinton Secretary of State, the third woman to hold the role.
In 2012, the state of New Hampshire made history as the first state have all five executive posts filled by women: Maggie Hasson became the second woman to serve as governor of the state, Jean Shaheen was then serving as senator, but was also the first female governor of New Hampshire, the former Attorney General, Kelly Ayote what is the republican senator for New Hampshire, and Annie, Kuster and Carol Shea Porter, represented the state in the house of representatives.
In 2013 the Secretary of Defense dropped the policy that excluded women from combat roles and fully integrated the Army which opened up a wave of new positions for women over the next few years. In the special forces, two women were the first to complete Ranger school. There was also a wave of first female graduates from other advanced schools in these years as well as the first female Marine infantry officer in 2017.
Shifting Title IX:
In the late 1990s the Supreme Court decided that schools could be held liable for knowing someone was being sexually harassed and not doing something. This was a particularly low bar that allowed schools to turn blind eyes to victims and did little to force schools to create cultures that were anti-harassment and safe spaces for learners. In the 2010s the impact of Title IX shifted, not through the court or law, but through “Dear Colleague” letters from the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Education, which the conservative right found disingenuous. Title IX expanded to have implications for sexual assault and harassment, as well as protections for trans youth. In 2011 an Obama administration letter put sexual harassment in the national spotlight. The challenge with sexual assault on college campuses is that assault is a crime, and should be managed by the courts. Schools are also tasked, under Title IX with protecting victims from their harassers. Typically this is resolved by separating students into different classes, dorms, etc. However, this gets complicated when courts have failed to convict someone, often due to a high burden of proof in the court systems. Someone should be innocent until proven guilty, but what should schools do while the legal process runs its course? Sexual harassment and assault are challenging from a legal perspective due to limited evidence and a lot of he said she said allegations.
Emma Sulkowicz at Columbia University raised the issue to national attention with her mattress protest, in which she carried around the mattress she was allegedly raped on in 2012. She received institutional credit for the protest as part of her senior performance art project, yet Columbia failed to find her accused rapist at fault and took no institutional steps to penalize him, like expulsion. Despite conservatives suggesting that women frequently subject men to false claims of rape and assault, studies suggest that only 8 percent of rape accusations are false.
All of this does little to resolve the issues. If the courts and the campus didn’t have enough evidence to convict him, was her protest harassment of an innocent man? These issues would find a champion in future President Donald Trump and his secretary of education Betsy DeVos.
In the late 1990s the Supreme Court decided that schools could be held liable for knowing someone was being sexually harassed and not doing something. This was a particularly low bar that allowed schools to turn blind eyes to victims and did little to force schools to create cultures that were anti-harassment and safe spaces for learners. In the 2010s the impact of Title IX shifted, not through the court or law, but through “Dear Colleague” letters from the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Education, which the conservative right found disingenuous. Title IX expanded to have implications for sexual assault and harassment, as well as protections for trans youth. In 2011 an Obama administration letter put sexual harassment in the national spotlight. The challenge with sexual assault on college campuses is that assault is a crime, and should be managed by the courts. Schools are also tasked, under Title IX with protecting victims from their harassers. Typically this is resolved by separating students into different classes, dorms, etc. However, this gets complicated when courts have failed to convict someone, often due to a high burden of proof in the court systems. Someone should be innocent until proven guilty, but what should schools do while the legal process runs its course? Sexual harassment and assault are challenging from a legal perspective due to limited evidence and a lot of he said she said allegations.
Emma Sulkowicz at Columbia University raised the issue to national attention with her mattress protest, in which she carried around the mattress she was allegedly raped on in 2012. She received institutional credit for the protest as part of her senior performance art project, yet Columbia failed to find her accused rapist at fault and took no institutional steps to penalize him, like expulsion. Despite conservatives suggesting that women frequently subject men to false claims of rape and assault, studies suggest that only 8 percent of rape accusations are false.
All of this does little to resolve the issues. If the courts and the campus didn’t have enough evidence to convict him, was her protest harassment of an innocent man? These issues would find a champion in future President Donald Trump and his secretary of education Betsy DeVos.
Women’s March:
Hillary Clinton was not done with politics. After four years in the Obama administration, she resigned as Secretary of State to make another bid for the presidency. The 2016 election was hotly contested with opponent Donald J, Trump revealing his disrespect for women. The infamous Hollywood tape from 2005 released to the press during his campaign, in which he bragged about sexually assaulting women, was just one example. Trump’s crude language about how wealth and fame gave him license to force himself on women prompted numerous women to come forward with accusations of sexual harassment, assault, and rape. Trump and his allies dismissed his foul language about women as “locker room talk,” which infuriated people across the political spectrum. The tape also proved problematic for a number of female politicians, Senator Kelly Ayotte from New Hampshire spoke out against Trump, and that led to her political end in the Republican party. She didn’t win reelection when New Hampshire’s popular governor, Maggie Hassan, ran against her for Senate.
But many women did accept Donald Trump's campaign of grievances, hatred of class, education, expertise, and government. They tolerated his racism, anti-semitism, and disrespect for women. His rallies attract women who believe that he is being mistreated by a Democratic Party conspiracy to undermine him. White, suburban, and rural women in particular supported Trump. Many were loyal Republican voters who just voted on party lines. Others were anti-abortion, while some favored Trump's stance on immigration and national security. Many, like male Republicans, just abhorred Hillary Clinton who represented the political establishment they felt had left them behind. When Clinton called Trump supporters “deplorables,” some women saw it as a badge of honor and wore it on shirts.
Hillary Clinton was not done with politics. After four years in the Obama administration, she resigned as Secretary of State to make another bid for the presidency. The 2016 election was hotly contested with opponent Donald J, Trump revealing his disrespect for women. The infamous Hollywood tape from 2005 released to the press during his campaign, in which he bragged about sexually assaulting women, was just one example. Trump’s crude language about how wealth and fame gave him license to force himself on women prompted numerous women to come forward with accusations of sexual harassment, assault, and rape. Trump and his allies dismissed his foul language about women as “locker room talk,” which infuriated people across the political spectrum. The tape also proved problematic for a number of female politicians, Senator Kelly Ayotte from New Hampshire spoke out against Trump, and that led to her political end in the Republican party. She didn’t win reelection when New Hampshire’s popular governor, Maggie Hassan, ran against her for Senate.
But many women did accept Donald Trump's campaign of grievances, hatred of class, education, expertise, and government. They tolerated his racism, anti-semitism, and disrespect for women. His rallies attract women who believe that he is being mistreated by a Democratic Party conspiracy to undermine him. White, suburban, and rural women in particular supported Trump. Many were loyal Republican voters who just voted on party lines. Others were anti-abortion, while some favored Trump's stance on immigration and national security. Many, like male Republicans, just abhorred Hillary Clinton who represented the political establishment they felt had left them behind. When Clinton called Trump supporters “deplorables,” some women saw it as a badge of honor and wore it on shirts.
Some criticisms of Trump came from within the conservative community. During the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, there was a notable and widely covered incident involving candidate Donald Trump and Megyn Kelly, a journalist and former anchor at Fox News. Kelly was one of the moderators for the debate and asked Trump about his derogatory comments toward women that had been noted by the press on the campaign trail. She read some of the things he had called women including but not limited to "fat pigs," "dogs," "slobs," and "disgusting animals." She asked if this language was befitting of a presidential candidate. Trump was angry and after the debate ripped into her on social media. He insinuated that her tough questioning might have been due to her menstrual cycle. Kelly and her family were harassed by Trump supporters. Trump's treatment of Kelly throughout the campaign cycle was seen as emblematic of his confrontational and unfiltered communication style.
Then, on November 8, 2016, as the majority of women gathered around the country to watch the first woman win a presidential election, Trump began winning states Clinton was slated to secure. 54%, the overwhelming majority, had voted against Trump. But while 98% of Black women voters went for Clinton, only 45% of white voters did. Trump won the Electoral College, despite Clinton winning the popular vote, only the fifth time in US history.
This was a history making moment for one woman: Kellyanne Conway. She became the first woman to successfully manage a presidential campaign. Then and through the early part of his presidency, she was one of the most visible and vocal defenders of the Trump administration's policies and positions.
Still, 54% of women were shocked and the feeling was palpable in the days following the election. Veteran women’s organizers went to work with a public message to Trump and his allies: a Women’s March. Planned for the day after his inauguration, a nod to suffrage organizer Alice Paul, the march drew more than double the expected attendance: 500,000 women and allies arrived in Washington, DC. Sister marches were staged around the world in almost every major city. Marchers donned pink clothing for the occasions and knit hats at home with cat-like ears on top. These hats were dubbed “pussy hats” referencing Trump’s choice word in the infamous 2005 recording. Women stood against Trump.
Then, on November 8, 2016, as the majority of women gathered around the country to watch the first woman win a presidential election, Trump began winning states Clinton was slated to secure. 54%, the overwhelming majority, had voted against Trump. But while 98% of Black women voters went for Clinton, only 45% of white voters did. Trump won the Electoral College, despite Clinton winning the popular vote, only the fifth time in US history.
This was a history making moment for one woman: Kellyanne Conway. She became the first woman to successfully manage a presidential campaign. Then and through the early part of his presidency, she was one of the most visible and vocal defenders of the Trump administration's policies and positions.
Still, 54% of women were shocked and the feeling was palpable in the days following the election. Veteran women’s organizers went to work with a public message to Trump and his allies: a Women’s March. Planned for the day after his inauguration, a nod to suffrage organizer Alice Paul, the march drew more than double the expected attendance: 500,000 women and allies arrived in Washington, DC. Sister marches were staged around the world in almost every major city. Marchers donned pink clothing for the occasions and knit hats at home with cat-like ears on top. These hats were dubbed “pussy hats” referencing Trump’s choice word in the infamous 2005 recording. Women stood against Trump.
#MeToo:
Trump was seemingly untouchable in the presidency, but women had enough. Just a couple months later, Alyssa Milano encouraged people who had experienced sexual harassment and abuse to speak out about their stories using #MeToo on Twitter. The goal was to show how widespread sexual harassment and assault are and combat the harmful rhetoric used by Trump. The hashtag came from a term coined by social activist Tarana Burke on MySpace as part of her work. Milanos tweet in 2017 capitalized on the despair so many women felt around the world. It quickly generated 1.7 million #MeToo tweets in over 85 countries. The movement also sparked conversations on Facebook, with 4.7 million people from around the world talking about it within 24 hours. The power and importance of social media in mobilizing this social movement were evident.
On October 5, 2017, journalists at the New York Times, Megan Twohey and Jodi Kantor, published an investigative report detailing Holywood producer Harvey Weinstein’s decades of sexual abuse. More than 80 women publicly accused Weinstein of sexually abusing or assaulting them. He was sentenced to 23 years in prison. Weinstein was representative of a number of famous Hollywood men taken down by the #MeToo movement.
#MeToo spread to other industries. On January 18, 2018, Olympic gymnastics gold medalist Simone Biles released a statement on Twitter confirming that the former USA Gymnastics physician Larry Nassar had sexually assaulted her and that USA Gymnastics covered up the abuse. 300 other women made similar claims. After a class action lawsuit, Nassar is serving a life sentence.
Trump was seemingly untouchable in the presidency, but women had enough. Just a couple months later, Alyssa Milano encouraged people who had experienced sexual harassment and abuse to speak out about their stories using #MeToo on Twitter. The goal was to show how widespread sexual harassment and assault are and combat the harmful rhetoric used by Trump. The hashtag came from a term coined by social activist Tarana Burke on MySpace as part of her work. Milanos tweet in 2017 capitalized on the despair so many women felt around the world. It quickly generated 1.7 million #MeToo tweets in over 85 countries. The movement also sparked conversations on Facebook, with 4.7 million people from around the world talking about it within 24 hours. The power and importance of social media in mobilizing this social movement were evident.
On October 5, 2017, journalists at the New York Times, Megan Twohey and Jodi Kantor, published an investigative report detailing Holywood producer Harvey Weinstein’s decades of sexual abuse. More than 80 women publicly accused Weinstein of sexually abusing or assaulting them. He was sentenced to 23 years in prison. Weinstein was representative of a number of famous Hollywood men taken down by the #MeToo movement.
#MeToo spread to other industries. On January 18, 2018, Olympic gymnastics gold medalist Simone Biles released a statement on Twitter confirming that the former USA Gymnastics physician Larry Nassar had sexually assaulted her and that USA Gymnastics covered up the abuse. 300 other women made similar claims. After a class action lawsuit, Nassar is serving a life sentence.
Women in the Trump Presidency:
By most feminist measures, Trump’s presidency was an assault on women’s rights. He appointed three justices to the Supreme Court, all of whom opposed abortion rights and access to reproductive health care and spoke openly about his desire to dismantle Roe v. Wade. Trump was also credibly accused by multiple women during his presidency of sexual misconduct. He was accused of falsifying records in order to pay hush money to a former adult film actress, Stormy Daniels, to stop her from talking about an alleged affair they had. Trump reimbursed his lawyer, Cohen, through a series of monthly checks, which prosecutors say caused business records to be falsified to disguise the true purpose of the payments. Cohen served prison time for his role in this scandal. He was indicted in 2023 for an incident that took place in the 1990s. E. Jean Carroll claimed Trump assaulted her in a dressing room and the jury found him liable for battery and defamation. She won $5 million in the civil case. These issues and accusations plagued the Trump presidency and are still being battled in court.
His wife Melania was in the middle of all this and one has to imagine the public spotlight on her marriage and young son were hard. She stood in stark contrast to Michelle Obama, a lawyer and an activist. Melania was a former model and the first immigrant to hold the role of First Lady. She was reserved, private, and seemingly submissive. She initiated a BE BEST initiative which hoped to address bullying and became an ambassador for kindness, which was a bit ironic given the bullying espoused so publicly by her husband.
Yet women were visible as forceful leaders all over the Trump administration. Ivanka Trump, his daughter, served as a senior advisor to the President. She focused on issues such as workforce development, women's economic empowerment, and paid family leave. She often represented the administration at international events and advocated for policies related to education and economic opportunities.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders served as the White House Press Secretary from July 2017 to June 2019. She was responsible for communicating the administration's message to the media and the public. Sanders played a significant role in shaping the narrative around Trump's policies and decisions. She went on to become Governor of Arkansas.
By most feminist measures, Trump’s presidency was an assault on women’s rights. He appointed three justices to the Supreme Court, all of whom opposed abortion rights and access to reproductive health care and spoke openly about his desire to dismantle Roe v. Wade. Trump was also credibly accused by multiple women during his presidency of sexual misconduct. He was accused of falsifying records in order to pay hush money to a former adult film actress, Stormy Daniels, to stop her from talking about an alleged affair they had. Trump reimbursed his lawyer, Cohen, through a series of monthly checks, which prosecutors say caused business records to be falsified to disguise the true purpose of the payments. Cohen served prison time for his role in this scandal. He was indicted in 2023 for an incident that took place in the 1990s. E. Jean Carroll claimed Trump assaulted her in a dressing room and the jury found him liable for battery and defamation. She won $5 million in the civil case. These issues and accusations plagued the Trump presidency and are still being battled in court.
His wife Melania was in the middle of all this and one has to imagine the public spotlight on her marriage and young son were hard. She stood in stark contrast to Michelle Obama, a lawyer and an activist. Melania was a former model and the first immigrant to hold the role of First Lady. She was reserved, private, and seemingly submissive. She initiated a BE BEST initiative which hoped to address bullying and became an ambassador for kindness, which was a bit ironic given the bullying espoused so publicly by her husband.
Yet women were visible as forceful leaders all over the Trump administration. Ivanka Trump, his daughter, served as a senior advisor to the President. She focused on issues such as workforce development, women's economic empowerment, and paid family leave. She often represented the administration at international events and advocated for policies related to education and economic opportunities.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders served as the White House Press Secretary from July 2017 to June 2019. She was responsible for communicating the administration's message to the media and the public. Sanders played a significant role in shaping the narrative around Trump's policies and decisions. She went on to become Governor of Arkansas.
These women were short lived in the Trump presidency, as were so many men. The Trump administration experienced a high turnover of key staff members, including cabinet members, advisors, and other officials. This turnover led to a lack of consistency and stability in policy implementation and decision-making. Trump's rhetoric on various issues, including immigration, race, and international relations, was often polarizing. His statements and tweets sometimes sparked controversy and backlash, both domestically and internationally.
Fermenting the resistance throughout Trump’s chaotic administration was the first female speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi was a Washington insider, a feminist, and a Democratic moderate. She was able to take bold stands against Trump. Perhaps the most notable moment in her career was after one of Donald Trump’s State of the Union addresses, in which she tore up a copy of Trump’s speech with a look of disdain as the country watched on.
In every state of the union in the four years of Trump's presidency, Democratic women, who made up the majority of women in Congress, wore white clothing at the House’s opening session in homage to the suffragists, and to stand apart from male members of Congress wearing black suits. Republican women did not join them in the stand. The women made headlines as they visibly showed disapproval for Donald Trump and their solidarity with each other.
In 2020, a woman was finally elected to one of the top executive roles. Barack Obama‘s Vice President, Joe Biden, ran for the presidency against Donald Trump in the midst of the Covid pandemic, nominating Kamala Harris to be his Vice President. The COVID pandemic was a deciding issue in the campaign, with the candidates taking very different positions. The sinking economy and high unemployment rate made a challenger to the incumbent possible. But women were also highly motivated as voters. Threats to abortion access, years of rhetoric that was decidedly anti-women, scandals in which Trump was credibly accused of sexually assaulting women had worn even loyal women thin.
Joe Biden also made a smart political move to appoint a woman of color as Vice President. Kamala Harris has a mixed African and Indian heritage. A former Attorney General for California.
Fermenting the resistance throughout Trump’s chaotic administration was the first female speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi was a Washington insider, a feminist, and a Democratic moderate. She was able to take bold stands against Trump. Perhaps the most notable moment in her career was after one of Donald Trump’s State of the Union addresses, in which she tore up a copy of Trump’s speech with a look of disdain as the country watched on.
In every state of the union in the four years of Trump's presidency, Democratic women, who made up the majority of women in Congress, wore white clothing at the House’s opening session in homage to the suffragists, and to stand apart from male members of Congress wearing black suits. Republican women did not join them in the stand. The women made headlines as they visibly showed disapproval for Donald Trump and their solidarity with each other.
In 2020, a woman was finally elected to one of the top executive roles. Barack Obama‘s Vice President, Joe Biden, ran for the presidency against Donald Trump in the midst of the Covid pandemic, nominating Kamala Harris to be his Vice President. The COVID pandemic was a deciding issue in the campaign, with the candidates taking very different positions. The sinking economy and high unemployment rate made a challenger to the incumbent possible. But women were also highly motivated as voters. Threats to abortion access, years of rhetoric that was decidedly anti-women, scandals in which Trump was credibly accused of sexually assaulting women had worn even loyal women thin.
Joe Biden also made a smart political move to appoint a woman of color as Vice President. Kamala Harris has a mixed African and Indian heritage. A former Attorney General for California.
Dobbs v Jackson:
On Friday, 24 June 2022, the Supreme Court of the US, now stacked with three Trump appointees, issued one of its final rulings of the term. In Dobbs v Jackson [Mississippi] Women’s Health Center, the Court overturned its 1973 decision in Roe v Wade that had permitted the termination of a pregnancy prior to the viability of a fetus, placing this important medical decision generally in the hands of women and their doctors. In Roe, the Court had presumed a woman‘s right to make her own reproductive health decisions with state intervention only in the final stages of a pregnancy, when it was presumed that a fetus could survive outside the womb. This created a standard based on fetal viability. Over half a century, the point at which a fetus could be considered viable shifted earlier and earlier, raising the question of the point at which a fetus should be considered a person. Significant advances in fetal viability contributed to a powerful, often vitriolic debate over whether a fetus is, in fact, an unborn child with inherent rights to personhood. The decision in Dobbs left it to the states to determine the availability and regulation of abortion and left the country with no coherent policy on the matter. Women’s rights groups saw this as a devastating setback in women’s struggle for reproductive autonomy.
Scholars attacked the Court’s abandonment of stare decisis, a legal principle that says courts should reject precedent only with great care. Historians attacked Alito’s assertion that, in the US, “an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973,” as patently untrue. Physicians disputed his claim that a fetus can feel pain as neurologically impossible. And almost all opponents of the decision questioned the principle of originalism, which required that rights be “deeply rooted in the nation’s history,” because the American Constitution neglected to mention women at all– so if originalist perspectives must be taken, where do women stand? Americans enjoy many rights that do not appear in the original Constitution, including a woman’s right to vote, an African-American’s right to full citizenship, and everyone’s right to privacy. These rights are enshrined in amendments and Supreme Court rulings that speak to the flexibility of basic American constitutional principles.
On Friday, 24 June 2022, the Supreme Court of the US, now stacked with three Trump appointees, issued one of its final rulings of the term. In Dobbs v Jackson [Mississippi] Women’s Health Center, the Court overturned its 1973 decision in Roe v Wade that had permitted the termination of a pregnancy prior to the viability of a fetus, placing this important medical decision generally in the hands of women and their doctors. In Roe, the Court had presumed a woman‘s right to make her own reproductive health decisions with state intervention only in the final stages of a pregnancy, when it was presumed that a fetus could survive outside the womb. This created a standard based on fetal viability. Over half a century, the point at which a fetus could be considered viable shifted earlier and earlier, raising the question of the point at which a fetus should be considered a person. Significant advances in fetal viability contributed to a powerful, often vitriolic debate over whether a fetus is, in fact, an unborn child with inherent rights to personhood. The decision in Dobbs left it to the states to determine the availability and regulation of abortion and left the country with no coherent policy on the matter. Women’s rights groups saw this as a devastating setback in women’s struggle for reproductive autonomy.
Scholars attacked the Court’s abandonment of stare decisis, a legal principle that says courts should reject precedent only with great care. Historians attacked Alito’s assertion that, in the US, “an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973,” as patently untrue. Physicians disputed his claim that a fetus can feel pain as neurologically impossible. And almost all opponents of the decision questioned the principle of originalism, which required that rights be “deeply rooted in the nation’s history,” because the American Constitution neglected to mention women at all– so if originalist perspectives must be taken, where do women stand? Americans enjoy many rights that do not appear in the original Constitution, including a woman’s right to vote, an African-American’s right to full citizenship, and everyone’s right to privacy. These rights are enshrined in amendments and Supreme Court rulings that speak to the flexibility of basic American constitutional principles.
Justice Alito’s opinion represents a profound attack on the rights of women, particularly in its originalist claim that women have no guarantee to rights that were not protected by the Fourteenth Amendment that was ratified in 1868. In Dobbs, Justice Alito adopted the reasoning of his late colleague on the Court, Antonin Scalia, who argued that the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause contains no explicit protections for women and that the concerns of the authors of the Reconstruction Amendments focused on race, not gender. From the originalist point of view that appears to dominate the current Supreme Court, providing for equal protection for women, pregnant or not, has no constitutional legitimacy. Women, then, are to be considered in light of the law and practice of the late 1860s rather than practices and standards of today.
Justice Alito and his conservative colleagues argued that the US has no tradition of permitting abortion. They cited a voluminous list of laws that prohibited the practice, while ignoring common practices that allowed women to terminate a pregnancy prior to “quickening,” or a perception of movement of the fetus in utero. The Dobbs ruling is a damaging blow to women’s rights in the US. Despite Justice Alito’s declaration that the Court’s opinion applies only to the issue of abortion, other rights may soon be under attack. In his concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the right to privacy established in Griswold v Connecticut was vulnerable. This could mean that other rights not in the original Constitution such as contraception, gay marriage, and homosexuality itself, all of which are protected under the general concept of privacy, could be taken away or significantly diminished in future Court rulings.
Justice Alito and his conservative colleagues argued that the US has no tradition of permitting abortion. They cited a voluminous list of laws that prohibited the practice, while ignoring common practices that allowed women to terminate a pregnancy prior to “quickening,” or a perception of movement of the fetus in utero. The Dobbs ruling is a damaging blow to women’s rights in the US. Despite Justice Alito’s declaration that the Court’s opinion applies only to the issue of abortion, other rights may soon be under attack. In his concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the right to privacy established in Griswold v Connecticut was vulnerable. This could mean that other rights not in the original Constitution such as contraception, gay marriage, and homosexuality itself, all of which are protected under the general concept of privacy, could be taken away or significantly diminished in future Court rulings.
Women and Climate Change:
Climate change is defined as long-term, large-scale changes in temperature and weather patterns. Scientists have shown that today our planet is around 1.1°C (1.8°F) warmer than it was in the late 19th Century, and that warming has been caused by human activities. A changing climate is already impacting agriculture, economic productivity, health, and migration across the world. These changes are likely to negatively impact women, who are less able to migrate to new opportunities or safer environments, have access to less money to adjust to a changing climate and who are expected to see increases in their care labor as health and social services are impacted. One major contributor to global climate change is what is called the greenhouse effect.
The greenhouse effect describes the way in which gasses in our atmosphere – primarily carbon dioxide, methane, ozone, nitrous oxide, chlorofluorocarbons, and water vapor – trap heat from the sun and increase global temperatures. The greenhouse effect was discovered in 1856 by Eunice Newton Foote, an amateur meteorologist who had the opportunity to study a diverse range of scientific topics at Troy Female Seminary in New York. She also received hands-on chemistry lab experience in a time when women were not expected to study science at all. She was very aware of the struggles of women in the sciences and was an attendee of the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention on the rights of women.
Then, in advance of the 1856 meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Foote conducted a simple experiment. She filled a glass cylinder with a variety of the components of air: water vapor, hydrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide. What she discovered was that carbon dioxide was most effective at trapping heat, meaning that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere makes the planet warmer. Today we call this the greenhouse effect.
Thanks in part to her husband’s connections to Joseph Henry at the Smithsonian Institute, this paper was presented for the American Association for the Advancement of Science. However, few took major note of it. It was not until 2011 that it was uncovered that the original discovery of the greenhouse effect was made by Eunice Newton Foote and not by John Tyndall, who discovered the same mechanism three years later.
Today we understand that increased greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere have been caused primarily by human activities, such as burning fossil fuels for energy or transportation. Just as we have known about the greenhouse effect for over 150 years, so we have also had some of the solutions for decades. In the 1930s-1950s, Mária Telkes was a prominent inventor, known as the Sun Queen by her colleagues due to her incredible work on solar energy. In addition to her foundational work on solar thermal storage, she and architect Eleanor Raymond teamed up with philanthropist Amelia Peabody to build the Dover Sun House, one of the first houses heated by solar in the world. These types of energy technologies produce far fewer greenhouse gas emissions.
In the past decades, women all over the world have worked to address climate change – from Swedish activist Greta Thunberg to Costa Rican United Nations Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres to Kenyan Nobel Prize Winner Wangari Maathai. In the United States, a great deal of activism and policy discussion came to a head in 2019 when Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey proposed a wide-ranging resolution titled “Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal,” but commonly referred to as the Green New Deal. This proposal combined the economic focus on infrastructure and jobs of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal with a more contemporary emphasis on sustainability and equity. While the proposal was not passed by the Senate, many of its core ideas on promoting renewables and reaching Net Zero carbon emissions survive in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.
Conclusion:
#MeToo has had a significant impact on legislation, resulting in notable changes. One noteworthy example is the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, signed into law by President Biden at the federal level. This law makes arbitration agreements (and joint-action waivers) entered into before disputes related to sexual harassment or assault unenforceable.
Today, female governors, senators, and members of the House of Representatives represent a variety of political views, both liberal and conservative, suggesting that issues beyond women’s rights contribute to the election of women to serve their states. Women continue to make up only fractions of our political and economic leaders, and remain less visible in the media. Women make up 7 percent of the Fortune 500 CEOs, 6 percent of Nobel Prize Winners, 24 percent of “heard, read about or seen in newspaper, television and radio.” Women reported 37 percent of news stories, 31 percent of speaking characters, 23 percent of protagonists in film, 21 percent are filmmakers. In sport, they are paid staggeringly less than men in wages and prize money. In the 2018-midterm elections, women only made up 20 percent of Congress and only 6 out of 50 state governors were women. In 2022, only 12 out of 50 governors were women.
Motherhood complicates these statistics. 12 percent of women in the private sector don’t have any maternity leave. 25 percent of women must return to work within 2-weeks of giving birth. 9 percent of workplaces offer paid paternity leave and 76 percent of fathers return to work within a week of their child’s birth, making mothers the primary caregiver and denying them needed support in recovery from birth. The US has the highest infant mortality for wealthy countries, at 6.1 for every 1,000 births. 1 in 10 women suffer from postpartum depression in the United States. That includes me, if you’d like to put a face to the data. Single-parent households are mostly headed by women and have more than tripled since 1960. 35 percent of children live in single-parent households. Mothers are 40 percent more likely than fathers to report that they had personally felt the negative impact of child care issues on their careers.
Issues related to how to prosecute sexual assault and harassment remain and whether these issues should prevent someone from being president are yet to be determined. It is an empowering and yet strange time to be a woman in America with so many rights and policies in question.
Climate change is defined as long-term, large-scale changes in temperature and weather patterns. Scientists have shown that today our planet is around 1.1°C (1.8°F) warmer than it was in the late 19th Century, and that warming has been caused by human activities. A changing climate is already impacting agriculture, economic productivity, health, and migration across the world. These changes are likely to negatively impact women, who are less able to migrate to new opportunities or safer environments, have access to less money to adjust to a changing climate and who are expected to see increases in their care labor as health and social services are impacted. One major contributor to global climate change is what is called the greenhouse effect.
The greenhouse effect describes the way in which gasses in our atmosphere – primarily carbon dioxide, methane, ozone, nitrous oxide, chlorofluorocarbons, and water vapor – trap heat from the sun and increase global temperatures. The greenhouse effect was discovered in 1856 by Eunice Newton Foote, an amateur meteorologist who had the opportunity to study a diverse range of scientific topics at Troy Female Seminary in New York. She also received hands-on chemistry lab experience in a time when women were not expected to study science at all. She was very aware of the struggles of women in the sciences and was an attendee of the 1848 Seneca Falls Convention on the rights of women.
Then, in advance of the 1856 meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Foote conducted a simple experiment. She filled a glass cylinder with a variety of the components of air: water vapor, hydrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide. What she discovered was that carbon dioxide was most effective at trapping heat, meaning that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere makes the planet warmer. Today we call this the greenhouse effect.
Thanks in part to her husband’s connections to Joseph Henry at the Smithsonian Institute, this paper was presented for the American Association for the Advancement of Science. However, few took major note of it. It was not until 2011 that it was uncovered that the original discovery of the greenhouse effect was made by Eunice Newton Foote and not by John Tyndall, who discovered the same mechanism three years later.
Today we understand that increased greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere have been caused primarily by human activities, such as burning fossil fuels for energy or transportation. Just as we have known about the greenhouse effect for over 150 years, so we have also had some of the solutions for decades. In the 1930s-1950s, Mária Telkes was a prominent inventor, known as the Sun Queen by her colleagues due to her incredible work on solar energy. In addition to her foundational work on solar thermal storage, she and architect Eleanor Raymond teamed up with philanthropist Amelia Peabody to build the Dover Sun House, one of the first houses heated by solar in the world. These types of energy technologies produce far fewer greenhouse gas emissions.
In the past decades, women all over the world have worked to address climate change – from Swedish activist Greta Thunberg to Costa Rican United Nations Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres to Kenyan Nobel Prize Winner Wangari Maathai. In the United States, a great deal of activism and policy discussion came to a head in 2019 when Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey proposed a wide-ranging resolution titled “Recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal,” but commonly referred to as the Green New Deal. This proposal combined the economic focus on infrastructure and jobs of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal with a more contemporary emphasis on sustainability and equity. While the proposal was not passed by the Senate, many of its core ideas on promoting renewables and reaching Net Zero carbon emissions survive in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.
Conclusion:
#MeToo has had a significant impact on legislation, resulting in notable changes. One noteworthy example is the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, signed into law by President Biden at the federal level. This law makes arbitration agreements (and joint-action waivers) entered into before disputes related to sexual harassment or assault unenforceable.
Today, female governors, senators, and members of the House of Representatives represent a variety of political views, both liberal and conservative, suggesting that issues beyond women’s rights contribute to the election of women to serve their states. Women continue to make up only fractions of our political and economic leaders, and remain less visible in the media. Women make up 7 percent of the Fortune 500 CEOs, 6 percent of Nobel Prize Winners, 24 percent of “heard, read about or seen in newspaper, television and radio.” Women reported 37 percent of news stories, 31 percent of speaking characters, 23 percent of protagonists in film, 21 percent are filmmakers. In sport, they are paid staggeringly less than men in wages and prize money. In the 2018-midterm elections, women only made up 20 percent of Congress and only 6 out of 50 state governors were women. In 2022, only 12 out of 50 governors were women.
Motherhood complicates these statistics. 12 percent of women in the private sector don’t have any maternity leave. 25 percent of women must return to work within 2-weeks of giving birth. 9 percent of workplaces offer paid paternity leave and 76 percent of fathers return to work within a week of their child’s birth, making mothers the primary caregiver and denying them needed support in recovery from birth. The US has the highest infant mortality for wealthy countries, at 6.1 for every 1,000 births. 1 in 10 women suffer from postpartum depression in the United States. That includes me, if you’d like to put a face to the data. Single-parent households are mostly headed by women and have more than tripled since 1960. 35 percent of children live in single-parent households. Mothers are 40 percent more likely than fathers to report that they had personally felt the negative impact of child care issues on their careers.
Issues related to how to prosecute sexual assault and harassment remain and whether these issues should prevent someone from being president are yet to be determined. It is an empowering and yet strange time to be a woman in America with so many rights and policies in question.
Draw your own conclusions
|
Learn how to teach with inquiry.
Many of these lesson plans were sponsored in part by the Library of Congress Teaching with Primary Sources Eastern Region Program, coordinated by Waynesburg University, the History and Social Studies Education Faculty at Plymouth State University, and the Patrons of the Remedial Herstory Project. |
|
Lesson Plans from Other Organizations
- The National Women's History Museum has lesson plans on women's history.
- The Guilder Lehrman Institute for American History has lesson plans on women's history.
- The NY Historical Society has articles and classroom activities for teaching women's history.
- Unladylike 2020, in partnership with PBS, has primary sources to explore with students and outstanding videos on women from the Progressive era.
- The Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media has produced recommendations for teaching women's history with primary sources and provided a collection of sources for world history. Check them out!
- The Stanford History Education Group has a number of lesson plans about women in US History.
Period Specific Lesson Plans from Other Organizations
- C3 Teachers: This inquiry leads students through an investigation of the LGBTQ+ movement, primarily driven by the history of the movement through various accounts and perspectives. The compelling question—What makes a movement successful?—does not address whether or not the movement was successful, but instead assesses the components of a movement and whether the movement is in a period of growth or has already peaked. Although the focus of this inquiry is on the LGBTQ+ movement, parallels can be drawn to other social movements in history with respect to organization, activism, and overall execution, including the Civil Rights Movement or the women’s suffrage and rights movements. Specifically, this inquiry looks at four different aspects that can potentially shape a movement in its foundation as well as its rise, namely public reaction, government leaders and policies, Supreme Court cases, and personal experiences. Throughout the inquiry, students will examine each individual aspect independently, evaluating the merits, strengths, and significance of each provided source in the “Movement Analysis Organization Chart,” but the summative task will require a compilation and synthesis of the sources in this investigation in order to form an argument to address the compelling question.
- Voices of Democracy: In the speech Clinton positioned the United States as the moral authority in monitoring and enforcing sanctions for global human trafficking, while at the same time reiterating the importance of international cooperation and partnerships.
- Clio: In 1972, feminists in Washington, D.C. founded the nation’s first rape crisis center. Other centers were soon established across the country. In 1994, Congress passed the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). The act was created in response to the nation-wide, grassroots work of activists concerned with domestic violence, sexual assault, date rape, and stalking. This lesson introduces students to the history of efforts to stop violence against women.
- National Women’s History Museum: How has the Supreme Court shaped the lives of American women between 1908-2005? Students will analyze one of four Supreme Court cases that relate to the constitutional rights of women decided between 1908-2005. Students will become mini-experts on one Supreme Court cases and they will be exposed to the content, themes, and questions from the other three cases via peer to peer instruction of their classmates. The goal of this lesson is to introduce students to a broad range of Supreme Court cases that have impacted American women and to have them develop a working knowledge and expertise of at least one case by using primary sources such as the case ruling and secondary sources that will help students to understand the context.
- National History Day: Patsy Takemoto Mink (1927-2002) was born in Hawaii. She studied in Pennsylvania and Nebraska before moving back to Hawaii to earn her undergraduate degree and eventually received her J.D. from the University of Chicago in 1951. She moved back to Hawaii with her husband, John Francis Mink, and founded the Oahu Young Democrats in 1954. In the 1950s, Mink served as both a member of the territorial house of representatives and Hawaii Senate. After Hawaii achieved statehood in 1959, Mink unsuccessfully ran for the U.S. House of Representatives. Mink campaigned for the second representative seat in 1964 and won, making her the first woman of color and first Asian American woman to be elected to Congress. Mink is best known for her support of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society legislation, as well as her advocacy for women’s issues and equal rights. Mink worked tirelessly to earn support for the critical Title IX Amendment from her comprehensive education bill called Women’s Education Equity Act. Mink took a break from Congress after an unsuccessful bid for the Senate, but returned to Congress in 1990 and served until her death in September 2002.
- C3 Teachers: This twelfth grade annotated inquiry leads students through an investigation of a hotly debated issue in the United States: the gender wage gap. The compelling question “What should we do about the gender wage gap?” asks students to grapple not only with how to quantify and interpret the gap but also to consider ways of addressing the problem. Throughout the inquiry, students consider the degree to which economic inequality reflects social, political, or economic injustices or whether it simply reflects individual choices and the role the government should play in decreasing income inequality. Although this inquiry is rooted in a question about economics, no social issue is fully understood without examining a range of economic, historical, geographic, and political concepts in order to craft a full-bodied, evidence-based argument. This inquiry looks at the complexity of the gender wage gap issue through all four social studies disciplines. Students examine the structural factors that influence women’s choices as well as historical (e.g., Equal Pay Act of 1963) and pending (e.g., Paycheck Fairness Act) legislative efforts. Ultimately, students must find a way to measure the gender wage gap, determine if it is an issue worth addressing, and, if so, how to best address it, including private and public sector solutions.
M.A.D.D.
Vox: Why the US Drinking Age is 21 Video
Partial Transcript:
Prohibition, the 18th amendment to the US Constitution, banned alcohol in 1920. It was repealed by the 21st amendment — and after that, a lot of states settled on a drinking age of 21 and older… In the 70s, the 26th amendment changed the dynamic again. “That amendment, as you know, provides for the right to vote of all of our young people between 18 and 21, 11 million new voters as a result of this amendment” (Ronald Reagan). 18 year olds could be drafted to Vietnam and vote, so a lot of states decided they could drink.
That map was short lived for one reason… “Nearly 50,000 people were killed on our highways last year. Now out of that statistic comes an even more chilling one. Drunk drivers were involved in 25,000 of those fatalities, in addition to 750,000 injuries a year” (Ronald Reagan). Drinking age reform advocates quickly attributed drunk driving fatalities in the blue states, or 18 and older states, to earlier drinking ages. People argued that teens driving across state lines to drink or purchase alcohol increased drunk driving. This 1983 map was still a hodgepodge, but see how more states turned green — for 19— and yellow — for 20 years old? That was driven partly by an awareness campaign… Michael Jackson? He was being honored for letting his music be used in anti-drunk driving PSAs.
President Reagan is famous for saying: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” That made his strategy kind of surprising. “For even though drunk driving is a problem nation-wide, it can only be solved at the state and local level. Yet the Federal Government also has a role to play.” His thinking was influenced by two main groups. “Much of the credit for focusing public attention goes to the grassroots campaign of organizations like MADD, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, and RID, Remove Intoxicated Drivers” (Ronald Reagan).
Candace “Candy” Lightner founded MADD in 1980 after her daughter Cari was killed by a drunk driver. MADD’s goals at the time included making it easier to obtain DUI convictions... and raising the drinking age. This direction was clear at River Dell High School in Oradell, New Jersey, where President Reagan explained his unpredictable political evolution. The problem: “I appointed a Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving. They told us that alcohol related automobile accidents are the leading cause of teenage deaths in this country.”
The theory: “In states in which the drinking age has been raised, teenage drinking fatalities have gone down significantly. Here in New Jersey, you raised the drinking age to 21 in 1983, and you know what happened: you had a 26% reduction in nighttime single vehicle fatalities among 19 and 20 year olds in the first year alone” (Ronald Reagan).
The dilemma: “I was delighted again because I hoped that the states would, as they should, take this action themselves without federal orders or interference.” “It’s led to a kind of crazy quilt of different state drinking laws, and that’s led to what’s been called blood borders, with teenagers leaving their home to go the nearest state with a lower drinking age.”
And here? This is where the roads come in. The Interstate Highway Act of 1956 created a network of roads largely funded by Federal dollars. Those roads quickly became crucial to state economies. That money also became a way to bend the states to Federal priorities, even if it meant Reagan had to change his typical political positions. “I’ve decided to support legislation to withhold 5% of a state’s highway funds if it does not enact the 21-year-old drinking age. Some may feel that my decision is at odds with my philosophical viewpoint that state problems should involve state solutions, and it isn’t up to a big and overwhelming government in Washington to tell the states what to do. And you’re partly right. Beyond that, there are some special cases in which overwhelming need can be dealt with by prudent and limited federal action” (Ronald Reagan). The law passed.
That’s Candy Lightner, celebrating. “I’d like to make you an honorary mother against drunk drivers.” It wasn’t technically a nationwide drinking age law, but in effect — it was. “We have no misgiving about this judicious use of Federal power.” States quickly adopted the 21-year-old drinking age. Most couldn't afford to lose federal funding for their highways. Louisiana was the only state that held out at age 18 (due to a loophole, which it closed in the mid 90s). South Dakota challenged the law to preserve sale of low alcohol beer for 19 year olds and up, and it reached the Supreme Court. “Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the court, the issue in this case is whether or not Congress may condition the receipt of highway funds upon a state having in effect 21-year-old drinking age.” The court ruled 7-2, stating it was within Congress’s powers to control spending that promoted “general welfare,” argued as the reduction of youth drinking and driving via the 21-year-old drinking age. Did it work?
Most studies of studies declare “case closed” — that the higher drinking age saves lives, and “reduces alcohol consumption.” Skeptics, like people from the libertarian Cato Institute, claim a broader cultural change, not a law, should be credited with saving lives. Reagan himself kind of argued both sides, saying that, “the new minimum drinking age is working,” but that “my friends, there’s so much more to do, and it’s not government that can do it.”
Politically, Ronald Reagan using Federal purse strings to strong arm states is…a strange pairing. But beyond the politics, there’s a bigger message. The Federal government has used other levers to push states, but to change the drinking age there was one big tool. The thing that changed the country wasn’t just the lines on states’ edges. It was the ones that run through them.
Vox.com. “Why the US Drinking Age Is 21.” YouTube. YouTube, August 23, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aWYJugVTs4.
Guiding Questions:
Prohibition, the 18th amendment to the US Constitution, banned alcohol in 1920. It was repealed by the 21st amendment — and after that, a lot of states settled on a drinking age of 21 and older… In the 70s, the 26th amendment changed the dynamic again. “That amendment, as you know, provides for the right to vote of all of our young people between 18 and 21, 11 million new voters as a result of this amendment” (Ronald Reagan). 18 year olds could be drafted to Vietnam and vote, so a lot of states decided they could drink.
That map was short lived for one reason… “Nearly 50,000 people were killed on our highways last year. Now out of that statistic comes an even more chilling one. Drunk drivers were involved in 25,000 of those fatalities, in addition to 750,000 injuries a year” (Ronald Reagan). Drinking age reform advocates quickly attributed drunk driving fatalities in the blue states, or 18 and older states, to earlier drinking ages. People argued that teens driving across state lines to drink or purchase alcohol increased drunk driving. This 1983 map was still a hodgepodge, but see how more states turned green — for 19— and yellow — for 20 years old? That was driven partly by an awareness campaign… Michael Jackson? He was being honored for letting his music be used in anti-drunk driving PSAs.
President Reagan is famous for saying: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” That made his strategy kind of surprising. “For even though drunk driving is a problem nation-wide, it can only be solved at the state and local level. Yet the Federal Government also has a role to play.” His thinking was influenced by two main groups. “Much of the credit for focusing public attention goes to the grassroots campaign of organizations like MADD, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, and RID, Remove Intoxicated Drivers” (Ronald Reagan).
Candace “Candy” Lightner founded MADD in 1980 after her daughter Cari was killed by a drunk driver. MADD’s goals at the time included making it easier to obtain DUI convictions... and raising the drinking age. This direction was clear at River Dell High School in Oradell, New Jersey, where President Reagan explained his unpredictable political evolution. The problem: “I appointed a Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving. They told us that alcohol related automobile accidents are the leading cause of teenage deaths in this country.”
The theory: “In states in which the drinking age has been raised, teenage drinking fatalities have gone down significantly. Here in New Jersey, you raised the drinking age to 21 in 1983, and you know what happened: you had a 26% reduction in nighttime single vehicle fatalities among 19 and 20 year olds in the first year alone” (Ronald Reagan).
The dilemma: “I was delighted again because I hoped that the states would, as they should, take this action themselves without federal orders or interference.” “It’s led to a kind of crazy quilt of different state drinking laws, and that’s led to what’s been called blood borders, with teenagers leaving their home to go the nearest state with a lower drinking age.”
And here? This is where the roads come in. The Interstate Highway Act of 1956 created a network of roads largely funded by Federal dollars. Those roads quickly became crucial to state economies. That money also became a way to bend the states to Federal priorities, even if it meant Reagan had to change his typical political positions. “I’ve decided to support legislation to withhold 5% of a state’s highway funds if it does not enact the 21-year-old drinking age. Some may feel that my decision is at odds with my philosophical viewpoint that state problems should involve state solutions, and it isn’t up to a big and overwhelming government in Washington to tell the states what to do. And you’re partly right. Beyond that, there are some special cases in which overwhelming need can be dealt with by prudent and limited federal action” (Ronald Reagan). The law passed.
That’s Candy Lightner, celebrating. “I’d like to make you an honorary mother against drunk drivers.” It wasn’t technically a nationwide drinking age law, but in effect — it was. “We have no misgiving about this judicious use of Federal power.” States quickly adopted the 21-year-old drinking age. Most couldn't afford to lose federal funding for their highways. Louisiana was the only state that held out at age 18 (due to a loophole, which it closed in the mid 90s). South Dakota challenged the law to preserve sale of low alcohol beer for 19 year olds and up, and it reached the Supreme Court. “Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the court, the issue in this case is whether or not Congress may condition the receipt of highway funds upon a state having in effect 21-year-old drinking age.” The court ruled 7-2, stating it was within Congress’s powers to control spending that promoted “general welfare,” argued as the reduction of youth drinking and driving via the 21-year-old drinking age. Did it work?
Most studies of studies declare “case closed” — that the higher drinking age saves lives, and “reduces alcohol consumption.” Skeptics, like people from the libertarian Cato Institute, claim a broader cultural change, not a law, should be credited with saving lives. Reagan himself kind of argued both sides, saying that, “the new minimum drinking age is working,” but that “my friends, there’s so much more to do, and it’s not government that can do it.”
Politically, Ronald Reagan using Federal purse strings to strong arm states is…a strange pairing. But beyond the politics, there’s a bigger message. The Federal government has used other levers to push states, but to change the drinking age there was one big tool. The thing that changed the country wasn’t just the lines on states’ edges. It was the ones that run through them.
Vox.com. “Why the US Drinking Age Is 21.” YouTube. YouTube, August 23, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aWYJugVTs4.
Guiding Questions:
- Based on this video, did MADD impact federal policy related to drunk driving?
- According to this video, did legislation alone help change drunk driving?
American Addiction Centers: Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD)
Every single day in the United States, 28 people die in a car crash that involves a driver who is under the influence of and impaired by alcohol, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) publishes. This equates to just more than one death every hour of every day in America.
After the senseless death of her 13-year-old daughter Cari, who was killed by a drunk driver, Candace Lightner began feverishly working in her home state of California to raise awareness about drunk driving and to attempt to illicit change in drunk driving laws. Together with another mother, Cindi Lamb, whose child was a victim of a crash with an alcohol-impaired driver, the grassroots nonprofit organization Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, or MADD, was founded and incorporated in Sacramento, California on September 5th of 1980…
Since 1980, MADD reports that they have helped to cut drunk driving deaths in half, saved around 350,000 lives, and helped more than 850,000 victims. Today, there are several hundred local MADD chapters spread throughout the US and Canada. The journal World Psychiatry publishes that the MADD campaign has helped to get over 1,000 new laws involving alcohol passed on both a local and national level, including laws regarding server liability, the setting up of sobriety checkpoints, and raising the minimum drinking age. MADD has also influenced public perception of drunk driving, putting faces to the victims to highlight that these are not “accidents” but rather instances of avoidable violence and that the crime is not “victimless.”
… Arguably, MADD has been extremely influential, not only in affecting public policy and legislation, but also in changing public perception and social policy. As a grassroots organization, MADD has brought the crimes and tragedy of drunk driving consequences into the light, offering hope and encouragement for survivors, victims, and their families while also advocating for preventative efforts and positive change.
Editors of American Addiction Centers. “Effectiveness of Mothers Against Drunk Driving: Over the years, MADD has worked tirelessly to influence DUI laws, increase public awareness about underage drinking and impaired driving.” American Addiction Centers. December 13, 2022. https://alcohol.org/teens/mothers-against-drunk-driving/.
Guiding Questions
After the senseless death of her 13-year-old daughter Cari, who was killed by a drunk driver, Candace Lightner began feverishly working in her home state of California to raise awareness about drunk driving and to attempt to illicit change in drunk driving laws. Together with another mother, Cindi Lamb, whose child was a victim of a crash with an alcohol-impaired driver, the grassroots nonprofit organization Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, or MADD, was founded and incorporated in Sacramento, California on September 5th of 1980…
Since 1980, MADD reports that they have helped to cut drunk driving deaths in half, saved around 350,000 lives, and helped more than 850,000 victims. Today, there are several hundred local MADD chapters spread throughout the US and Canada. The journal World Psychiatry publishes that the MADD campaign has helped to get over 1,000 new laws involving alcohol passed on both a local and national level, including laws regarding server liability, the setting up of sobriety checkpoints, and raising the minimum drinking age. MADD has also influenced public perception of drunk driving, putting faces to the victims to highlight that these are not “accidents” but rather instances of avoidable violence and that the crime is not “victimless.”
… Arguably, MADD has been extremely influential, not only in affecting public policy and legislation, but also in changing public perception and social policy. As a grassroots organization, MADD has brought the crimes and tragedy of drunk driving consequences into the light, offering hope and encouragement for survivors, victims, and their families while also advocating for preventative efforts and positive change.
Editors of American Addiction Centers. “Effectiveness of Mothers Against Drunk Driving: Over the years, MADD has worked tirelessly to influence DUI laws, increase public awareness about underage drinking and impaired driving.” American Addiction Centers. December 13, 2022. https://alcohol.org/teens/mothers-against-drunk-driving/.
Guiding Questions
- Why is the name “Mothers” Against Drunk driving a powerful title to the organization?
- Why did Candy Lightner found MADD?
- Based on this article, did MADD impact federal policy related to drunk driving?
- According to this article, did legislation alone help change drunk driving?
Glasses: Video
Guiding Questions:
Maddcanada. “Glasses - Public Television Campaign.” YouTube. YouTube, November 20, 2007. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrhV3QTkNyw.
- What did it feel like watching this clip?
- Why might this public awareness campaign have been effective?
Maddcanada. “Glasses - Public Television Campaign.” YouTube. YouTube, November 20, 2007. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrhV3QTkNyw.
Drunk Driving Video
Guiding Questions:
Casskane007. “Best Madd Anti Dui Commercial Ever.” YouTube. YouTube, November 18, 2010. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b69J_bMoYk.
- What did it feel like watching this clip?
- Why might this public awareness campaign have been effective?
- Was the purpose of MADD’s early advertising campaign to support stricter laws relating to drinking and driving or to encourage individuals to make a personal choice to stop drinking and driving?
Casskane007. “Best Madd Anti Dui Commercial Ever.” YouTube. YouTube, November 18, 2010. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b69J_bMoYk.
John J Miller: The Case Against 21
Mothers Against Drunk Driving says on its website that setting the legal drinking age at 21, rather than 18, has saved “more than 21,000 lives” from alcohol-related traffic fatalities. It certainly sounds like a success story. But is it really so simple?
The former president of Middlebury College says that the picture is in fact far more complicated. “It’s just not true,” says John M. McCardell Jr. of MADD’s assertion. “I’m not going to claim that legal-age 21 has saved no lives at all, but it’s just one factor among many and it’s not anywhere near the most important factor.”As his report reveals, alcohol-related driving fatalities have fallen sharply since 1982, when a presidential commission on drunk driving urged states to raise their drinking ages to 21. That year, there were 1.64 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles of travel; in 2001, there were 0.63 deaths. That’s a drop of 62 percent.
This is an important achievement. Yet the drinking age probably played only a small role. The dramatic increase in seat-belt use almost certainly accounts for most of the improvement. The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration says that the proper use of seat belts reduces the odds of death for front-seat passengers involved in a car crashes by 45 percent. In 1984, when President Reagan linked federal highway funds to the 21-year drinking age, about 14 percent of motorists used seat belts. By 2004, this figure had shot up to 80 percent. Also during this period, life-saving airbags became a standard feature on cars.
What’s more, alcohol-related fatalities were beginning to decline before the movement for a raised drinking age got off the ground, thanks to a cultural shift. “As a society, we’ve become a lot more aware of the problem of drunk driving,” says McCardell. “When I was in school, nobody used the term ‘designated driver.’” Demographic forces helped out, too: In the 1980s, following the Baby Boom, the population of young people actually shrank. Fewer young drivers means fewer high-risk drivers, and so even if attitudes about seat belts and drunk driving hadn’t changed, there almost certainly would have been a reduction in traffic deaths anyway.
McCardell suggests that one effect of raising the drinking age was not to prevent deaths but merely to delay them. “The most common age for drinking-related deaths is now 21, followed by 22 and 23,” he says. “It seems that the minimum drinking age is as likely to have postponed fatalities as to have reduced them.”
Miller, John J. “John J. Miller on Drinking Age on National Review Online.” National Review Online, 2007. https://web.archive.org/web/20070829161232/http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzU4NTcwMTQ4NTBmYzVlNWMzZjgwYTRjYjgyMzllMjg%3D.
Guiding Questions
The former president of Middlebury College says that the picture is in fact far more complicated. “It’s just not true,” says John M. McCardell Jr. of MADD’s assertion. “I’m not going to claim that legal-age 21 has saved no lives at all, but it’s just one factor among many and it’s not anywhere near the most important factor.”As his report reveals, alcohol-related driving fatalities have fallen sharply since 1982, when a presidential commission on drunk driving urged states to raise their drinking ages to 21. That year, there were 1.64 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles of travel; in 2001, there were 0.63 deaths. That’s a drop of 62 percent.
This is an important achievement. Yet the drinking age probably played only a small role. The dramatic increase in seat-belt use almost certainly accounts for most of the improvement. The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration says that the proper use of seat belts reduces the odds of death for front-seat passengers involved in a car crashes by 45 percent. In 1984, when President Reagan linked federal highway funds to the 21-year drinking age, about 14 percent of motorists used seat belts. By 2004, this figure had shot up to 80 percent. Also during this period, life-saving airbags became a standard feature on cars.
What’s more, alcohol-related fatalities were beginning to decline before the movement for a raised drinking age got off the ground, thanks to a cultural shift. “As a society, we’ve become a lot more aware of the problem of drunk driving,” says McCardell. “When I was in school, nobody used the term ‘designated driver.’” Demographic forces helped out, too: In the 1980s, following the Baby Boom, the population of young people actually shrank. Fewer young drivers means fewer high-risk drivers, and so even if attitudes about seat belts and drunk driving hadn’t changed, there almost certainly would have been a reduction in traffic deaths anyway.
McCardell suggests that one effect of raising the drinking age was not to prevent deaths but merely to delay them. “The most common age for drinking-related deaths is now 21, followed by 22 and 23,” he says. “It seems that the minimum drinking age is as likely to have postponed fatalities as to have reduced them.”
Miller, John J. “John J. Miller on Drinking Age on National Review Online.” National Review Online, 2007. https://web.archive.org/web/20070829161232/http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzU4NTcwMTQ4NTBmYzVlNWMzZjgwYTRjYjgyMzllMjg%3D.
Guiding Questions
- Based on this article, did MADD impact federal policy related to drunk driving?
- According to this article, did legislation alone help change drunk driving?
Rick Sand: DUI Statistics In The United States
An arrest for a DUI can cause your insurance to skyrocket by around 71%. Many drivers find it impossible to get back on the road after their DUI, simply because the costs become too expensive for them to afford. However, drunk driving is on a decline. Between 1991 and 2017, the rate of accidents and fatalities has decreased by 50%. [T]he United States… are the third worst country when it comes to drunk driving—which obviously isn’t great. In 2015, South Africa was ranked number one as the worst country when it comes to drunk driving. With 58% of their fatal accidents involving alcohol in some way, they sit high above the second and third seats. The second seat goes to Canada, at 34% and the third to the United States at 31%. Countries on the lower end of the spectrum include Germany (9%), Russia (9%), India (5%), and China (4%).
WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU GET A DUI IN THE UNITED STATES?
…Some states will allow you to be released when bail is paid, but other states have a one- or two-day minimum sentence for people who are arrested for driving under the influence. Your circumstances may be different depending on the nature of your accident. If anyone else is injured, or even killed, your jail time could be much longer. However, this would normally be determined in court… After this, you’ll lose your license for a period of time. After your license is restored, you may have to deal with a variety of restrictions, like taking a breathalyzer before starting your car.
You may also have to serve probation, even if you don’t serve jail time. This probation will be used to keep someone from repeating an offense. If you were to repeat your offense, you may face greater jail time for breaking your probation.
Before getting your license back, you may have to attend driving school specifically for people convicted of DUIs. You’ll then have to pay your fines in order to get your license back. Your insurance may also go up because of your new DUI.
WHAT ARE DUI PENALTIES IN OTHER COUNTRIES?
Let’s look at South Africa, the country with the highest concentration of alcohol accidents in the world. In South Africa, it’s illegal to drive with a blood alcohol content greater than .05, a little lower than the US’s .08mg/dl. If you’re arrested for drunk driving, you’ll likely be granted bail. However, if you’re convicted a second time, you may be sent to prison for up to six years… In China, the legal limit for alcohol in the blood while driving is .02mg, much lower than both the US and South Africa. They have a zero-tolerance policy for repeat offenders, and may suspend your license for a few months even if you’re a first time offender.
DOES THE UNITED STATES HAVE STRICT-ENOUGH DUI LAWS?
When comparing the United States to other countries, it’s easy to see that many other countries have stricter laws than the US, especially when it comes to longer suspension times and higher fines. Other countries generally make it harder to get back on the road after a DUI… In China, their low tolerance policies seem to be working when it comes to keeping drunk drivers off the roads. The United States could experiment with tighter laws and see what happens. However, our percentages seem to be going down over the years.
Sand, Rick. “Comparing DUI Statistics of the U.S. vs. Other Countries.” Sand Law North Dakota, October 5, 2021. https://www.sandlawnd.com/dui-statistics-of-us-vs-other-countries/.
Guiding Questions
WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU GET A DUI IN THE UNITED STATES?
…Some states will allow you to be released when bail is paid, but other states have a one- or two-day minimum sentence for people who are arrested for driving under the influence. Your circumstances may be different depending on the nature of your accident. If anyone else is injured, or even killed, your jail time could be much longer. However, this would normally be determined in court… After this, you’ll lose your license for a period of time. After your license is restored, you may have to deal with a variety of restrictions, like taking a breathalyzer before starting your car.
You may also have to serve probation, even if you don’t serve jail time. This probation will be used to keep someone from repeating an offense. If you were to repeat your offense, you may face greater jail time for breaking your probation.
Before getting your license back, you may have to attend driving school specifically for people convicted of DUIs. You’ll then have to pay your fines in order to get your license back. Your insurance may also go up because of your new DUI.
WHAT ARE DUI PENALTIES IN OTHER COUNTRIES?
Let’s look at South Africa, the country with the highest concentration of alcohol accidents in the world. In South Africa, it’s illegal to drive with a blood alcohol content greater than .05, a little lower than the US’s .08mg/dl. If you’re arrested for drunk driving, you’ll likely be granted bail. However, if you’re convicted a second time, you may be sent to prison for up to six years… In China, the legal limit for alcohol in the blood while driving is .02mg, much lower than both the US and South Africa. They have a zero-tolerance policy for repeat offenders, and may suspend your license for a few months even if you’re a first time offender.
DOES THE UNITED STATES HAVE STRICT-ENOUGH DUI LAWS?
When comparing the United States to other countries, it’s easy to see that many other countries have stricter laws than the US, especially when it comes to longer suspension times and higher fines. Other countries generally make it harder to get back on the road after a DUI… In China, their low tolerance policies seem to be working when it comes to keeping drunk drivers off the roads. The United States could experiment with tighter laws and see what happens. However, our percentages seem to be going down over the years.
Sand, Rick. “Comparing DUI Statistics of the U.S. vs. Other Countries.” Sand Law North Dakota, October 5, 2021. https://www.sandlawnd.com/dui-statistics-of-us-vs-other-countries/.
Guiding Questions
- Based on this article, do laws impact the behavior of drunk drivers?
- According to this article, did legislation alone help change drunk driving?
Connie Koenenn: The Company She Keeps
When Candy Lightner went to work at a consulting firm that represents restaurants that serve alcohol, she considered the job compatible with her past as the crusading founder of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. But that hasn’t been the media perception. In a sudden wave of publicity this month, Lightner has found herself portrayed in news stories and on talk shows as having joined the enemy. “MADD Founder Switches Sides” was a typical headline, and “lobbyist for the liquor industry” the typical job description when the media discovered Lightner’s new position.
Lightner, who founded MADD in Fair Oaks, Calif., in 1980 when her 13-year-old daughter Cari was killed by a drunk driver, says she has not changed sides. “I am a government relations consultant on public policy issues, and it’s something I have wanted to do for a long time,” she says. Lightner accepted the job in November with Rick Berman, whose Washington, D.C.-based Berman and Co.'s clients include the American Beverage Institute, a 4,000-member trade organization representing restaurants and other establishments that serve alcohol.
She will lobby state legislatures to reject laws that lower the legal standard for driving under the influence to .08% blood-alcohol level because she agrees with the restaurant industry’s position that these are not the dangerous drivers and it is counterproductive to waste law enforcement resources on them. Only a few states, including California, have .08% laws. Most use .10%. “Lowering the level accomplishes nothing. I think we should target the repeat offenders--they are the real danger on our roads,” says Lightner, recalling that the man who killed her daughter had a long record of DUI arrests and had just been bailed out on a hit-and-run drunk-driving charge.
Berman says Lightner will lobby state legislatures for laws that distinguish among light, moderate and heavy drinkers, and adjust the penalties accordingly. “We think that as a person’s blood-alcohol level goes up, the penalties should get stiffer,” Berman says. “The restaurant industry has never done this before.” “This escalated penalty plan is a new approach in our country and I’m very excited about it,” Lightner says. The American Beverage Institute maintains that the .08% standard makes criminals of social drinkers and weakens law enforcement by stretching it over a wider pool of drivers than is necessary.
With this position, Lightner breaks ranks with MADD and other organizations in the anti-drunk driving movement. MADD’s national president, Rebecca Brown of Tampa, Fla., says she doesn’t criticize Lightner, who to the public personifies MADD’s success. The group has grown to 3 million members and is credited with toughening laws against drunk driving in every state and with reducing alcohol-related deaths on America’s highways. “Candy made a great difference in America and we can only be grateful,” Brown says. “The issue here is not Candy Lightner. It’s .08 and we are on different sides of that issue. We have a great deal of research and evidence that even experienced drivers are impaired at that blood-alcohol level.”
California MADD worked on the campaign to lower the state’s blood alcohol level to .08%. Michelle Payne at the Sacramento office says the group has received only a few calls about Lightner and that all comments on policy come from the national office.
MADD is lobbying for .08 because its leaders think this is an achievable goal, Brown says. “However, we believe that no one should drive after drinking, period.” Lightner says she is surprised at the negative reaction to her new post, since much of her progress with MADD was made in conjunction with the restaurant industry and she was praised for the results. “We got them, in some cases, to eliminate happy hours, and two-for-one drinks, and to initiate mandatory server training for bartenders and things like designated drivers and free taxi service,” she says.
After Lightner left MADD in 1985, she wrote a book about grieving, “Giving Sorrow Words,” published in 1990. Last year, she turned her attention to Americans Against Crime, a citizens’ group aimed at stemming violent crime. “We couldn’t raise the money to keep it going,” she says. “It was partly the economy.”
Lightner, who has two grown children, lives in Alexandria, Va. She says she joined Berman’s firm because she wants to continue to make a difference. “I’ve only been doing this for 2 1/2 months and I’m not discouraged. I believe strongly in what I’m doing and I have no problem about the world knowing.” Of her relationship with MADD, she says, the disagreement is with the blood-alcohol level and nothing more. “I oppose .08 and I advocate escalated penalties. I haven’t switched to the ‘other side.’ The ‘other side’ is being a defense attorney for drunk drivers.”
Koenenn, Connie. “The Company She Keeps : Drunk driving: Candy Lightner says she still wants reforms. But now that the MADD founder works for restaurants, some wonder whose side she’s really on.” Los Angeles Times. January 29, 1994. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-01-26-vw-15591-story.html.
Guiding Questions
Lightner, who founded MADD in Fair Oaks, Calif., in 1980 when her 13-year-old daughter Cari was killed by a drunk driver, says she has not changed sides. “I am a government relations consultant on public policy issues, and it’s something I have wanted to do for a long time,” she says. Lightner accepted the job in November with Rick Berman, whose Washington, D.C.-based Berman and Co.'s clients include the American Beverage Institute, a 4,000-member trade organization representing restaurants and other establishments that serve alcohol.
She will lobby state legislatures to reject laws that lower the legal standard for driving under the influence to .08% blood-alcohol level because she agrees with the restaurant industry’s position that these are not the dangerous drivers and it is counterproductive to waste law enforcement resources on them. Only a few states, including California, have .08% laws. Most use .10%. “Lowering the level accomplishes nothing. I think we should target the repeat offenders--they are the real danger on our roads,” says Lightner, recalling that the man who killed her daughter had a long record of DUI arrests and had just been bailed out on a hit-and-run drunk-driving charge.
Berman says Lightner will lobby state legislatures for laws that distinguish among light, moderate and heavy drinkers, and adjust the penalties accordingly. “We think that as a person’s blood-alcohol level goes up, the penalties should get stiffer,” Berman says. “The restaurant industry has never done this before.” “This escalated penalty plan is a new approach in our country and I’m very excited about it,” Lightner says. The American Beverage Institute maintains that the .08% standard makes criminals of social drinkers and weakens law enforcement by stretching it over a wider pool of drivers than is necessary.
With this position, Lightner breaks ranks with MADD and other organizations in the anti-drunk driving movement. MADD’s national president, Rebecca Brown of Tampa, Fla., says she doesn’t criticize Lightner, who to the public personifies MADD’s success. The group has grown to 3 million members and is credited with toughening laws against drunk driving in every state and with reducing alcohol-related deaths on America’s highways. “Candy made a great difference in America and we can only be grateful,” Brown says. “The issue here is not Candy Lightner. It’s .08 and we are on different sides of that issue. We have a great deal of research and evidence that even experienced drivers are impaired at that blood-alcohol level.”
California MADD worked on the campaign to lower the state’s blood alcohol level to .08%. Michelle Payne at the Sacramento office says the group has received only a few calls about Lightner and that all comments on policy come from the national office.
MADD is lobbying for .08 because its leaders think this is an achievable goal, Brown says. “However, we believe that no one should drive after drinking, period.” Lightner says she is surprised at the negative reaction to her new post, since much of her progress with MADD was made in conjunction with the restaurant industry and she was praised for the results. “We got them, in some cases, to eliminate happy hours, and two-for-one drinks, and to initiate mandatory server training for bartenders and things like designated drivers and free taxi service,” she says.
After Lightner left MADD in 1985, she wrote a book about grieving, “Giving Sorrow Words,” published in 1990. Last year, she turned her attention to Americans Against Crime, a citizens’ group aimed at stemming violent crime. “We couldn’t raise the money to keep it going,” she says. “It was partly the economy.”
Lightner, who has two grown children, lives in Alexandria, Va. She says she joined Berman’s firm because she wants to continue to make a difference. “I’ve only been doing this for 2 1/2 months and I’m not discouraged. I believe strongly in what I’m doing and I have no problem about the world knowing.” Of her relationship with MADD, she says, the disagreement is with the blood-alcohol level and nothing more. “I oppose .08 and I advocate escalated penalties. I haven’t switched to the ‘other side.’ The ‘other side’ is being a defense attorney for drunk drivers.”
Koenenn, Connie. “The Company She Keeps : Drunk driving: Candy Lightner says she still wants reforms. But now that the MADD founder works for restaurants, some wonder whose side she’s really on.” Los Angeles Times. January 29, 1994. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-01-26-vw-15591-story.html.
Guiding Questions
- Based on this article, what is the disagreement over 0.08?
- According to this article, do laws alone help change drunk driving?
Title IX
Title IX Timeline
Title IX Timeline:
1928: Betty Robinson becomes the first woman to win Gold in the 100 meter dash after women are allowed to compete in non-aesthetic events.
1936: A federal appeals court effectively says doctors can prescribe women birth control.
1947: The first Truman Commission report pushes for more equal access to higher education, including ending race and religious discrimination.
1953: Toni Stone becomes the first woman to regularly play professional baseball (Negro Leagues).
1954: U.S. Supreme Court rules “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” in landmark Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision.
1960: Wilma Rudolph becomes the first American woman to win three gold medals in an Olympics. The star Black sprinter becomes a prominent advocate for civil rights.
1963: The Commission on the Status of Women, headed by Eleanor Roosevelt, finds widespread discrimination against women in the U.S.. Congress passes the Equal Pay Act.
1964: The Civil Rights Act prevents sex discrimination and establishes the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Patsy Mink becomes the first woman of color in the U.S. House.
1966: Bobbi Gibb becomes the first woman to run the Boston Marathon violating a rule preventing women’s participation.
1967: Katherine Switzer registered for the Boston Marathon as K.V. Switzer and was forcibly attacked by the race director.
1971: The Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW) is founded to govern collegiate women’s athletics and administer national championships.
1972: Congress passes Title IX co-authored by Mink. Women are allowed to run in the Boston Marathon.
1973: The Supreme Court issues its Roe v. Wade opinion establishing the right to an abortion. Billie Jean King beats Bobby Riggs in the “The Battle of the Sexes” tennis exhibition match.
1974: The Women’s Educational Equity Act provides grants and contracts to help with “nonsexist curricula,” as well as to help institutions meet Title IX requirements.
1976: NCAA challenges the legality of Title IX regarding athletics in a lawsuit that is dismissed.
1977: Three female students at Yale, two graduates and a male faculty member become the first to sue over sexual harassment under Title IX (Alexander v. Yale). It would fail on appeal.
1979: U.S. officials put into effect the important three-prong test for Title IX compliance when it comes to athletics.
1984: Democrat Geraldine Ferraro becomes first woman to earn a vice presidential nomination from a major political party. The U.S. wins its first Olympic gold medal in basketball.
1991: Anita Hill testified that Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas had sexually harassed her.
1994: The Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act is passed requiring schools with federal financial aid programs to provide annual information regarding gender equity.
1996: Female athletes win a lawsuit and force Brown to restore funding for women’s sports. The NBA clears the way for the WNBA.
1999: Brandi Chastain scores winning goal of World Cup final in a shootout. This image is one of the most iconic images in sports history.
2005: In Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, the Supreme Court rules that individuals, including coaches and teachers, have a “right of action” under Title IX if they’re retaliated against for protesting sex discrimination.
2015: The United States’ 5-2 win over Japan in the World Cup final becomes the most viewed soccer game in the history of American television.
2016: The Obama administration says transgender students should be allowed to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity, rescinded by the Trump administration.
2017: Serena Williams wins her 23rd Grand Slam title, second-most of all time.
2020: New Title IX amendments take effect, largely regarding sexual harassment.
2021: Report rips NCAA for failing to uphold its commitment to gender equity.
2022: The U.S. women’s national soccer team reaches a milestone agreement to be paid equally to the men’s national team. U.S. Gymnastics athletes win 1 billion dollar lawsuit against the FBI mishandling of sexual assault by former coach.
Guiding Questions
1928: Betty Robinson becomes the first woman to win Gold in the 100 meter dash after women are allowed to compete in non-aesthetic events.
1936: A federal appeals court effectively says doctors can prescribe women birth control.
1947: The first Truman Commission report pushes for more equal access to higher education, including ending race and religious discrimination.
1953: Toni Stone becomes the first woman to regularly play professional baseball (Negro Leagues).
1954: U.S. Supreme Court rules “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” in landmark Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision.
1960: Wilma Rudolph becomes the first American woman to win three gold medals in an Olympics. The star Black sprinter becomes a prominent advocate for civil rights.
1963: The Commission on the Status of Women, headed by Eleanor Roosevelt, finds widespread discrimination against women in the U.S.. Congress passes the Equal Pay Act.
1964: The Civil Rights Act prevents sex discrimination and establishes the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Patsy Mink becomes the first woman of color in the U.S. House.
1966: Bobbi Gibb becomes the first woman to run the Boston Marathon violating a rule preventing women’s participation.
1967: Katherine Switzer registered for the Boston Marathon as K.V. Switzer and was forcibly attacked by the race director.
1971: The Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW) is founded to govern collegiate women’s athletics and administer national championships.
1972: Congress passes Title IX co-authored by Mink. Women are allowed to run in the Boston Marathon.
1973: The Supreme Court issues its Roe v. Wade opinion establishing the right to an abortion. Billie Jean King beats Bobby Riggs in the “The Battle of the Sexes” tennis exhibition match.
1974: The Women’s Educational Equity Act provides grants and contracts to help with “nonsexist curricula,” as well as to help institutions meet Title IX requirements.
1976: NCAA challenges the legality of Title IX regarding athletics in a lawsuit that is dismissed.
1977: Three female students at Yale, two graduates and a male faculty member become the first to sue over sexual harassment under Title IX (Alexander v. Yale). It would fail on appeal.
1979: U.S. officials put into effect the important three-prong test for Title IX compliance when it comes to athletics.
1984: Democrat Geraldine Ferraro becomes first woman to earn a vice presidential nomination from a major political party. The U.S. wins its first Olympic gold medal in basketball.
1991: Anita Hill testified that Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas had sexually harassed her.
1994: The Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act is passed requiring schools with federal financial aid programs to provide annual information regarding gender equity.
1996: Female athletes win a lawsuit and force Brown to restore funding for women’s sports. The NBA clears the way for the WNBA.
1999: Brandi Chastain scores winning goal of World Cup final in a shootout. This image is one of the most iconic images in sports history.
2005: In Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, the Supreme Court rules that individuals, including coaches and teachers, have a “right of action” under Title IX if they’re retaliated against for protesting sex discrimination.
2015: The United States’ 5-2 win over Japan in the World Cup final becomes the most viewed soccer game in the history of American television.
2016: The Obama administration says transgender students should be allowed to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity, rescinded by the Trump administration.
2017: Serena Williams wins her 23rd Grand Slam title, second-most of all time.
2020: New Title IX amendments take effect, largely regarding sexual harassment.
2021: Report rips NCAA for failing to uphold its commitment to gender equity.
2022: The U.S. women’s national soccer team reaches a milestone agreement to be paid equally to the men’s national team. U.S. Gymnastics athletes win 1 billion dollar lawsuit against the FBI mishandling of sexual assault by former coach.
Guiding Questions
- Based the timeline, why might this law have been necessary in 1972?
- Are there any events in this timeline that surprise you? Why or why not?
Ray Levy-Uyeda: Yale Women Crew Protest
In the spring of 1976, four years after the signing of Title IX, the landmark equity-in-education legislation, and eight years after Yale University voted to admit women applicants, 19 college-athletes marched into the office of the director of physical education and peeled away their Yale training uniforms to reveal their bare bodies. Across their chests and backs they had written, “Title IX.” A photo of the day’s protest taken by a Yale Daily News photographer shows Joni Barnett, physical education director, gawping at captain Chris Ernst as she read a prepared statement decrying the conditions of the women’s rowing program. They protested because the women’s rowing team, newly formed and already better than the men’s, could barely qualify as a program: the team had no locker rooms, no bathrooms, no equipment manager, and no one to wash their uniforms. Either because of a supposed lack of money or because they were women, the university didn’t think the team was worth the investment. "I think women were theoretical to them, but not real,” Ernst told me recently, reflecting on the women's treatment as athletes. After practice, the women athletes would wait on the bus that they shared with the men’s team, still soaked with cold river water, while the men athletes showered away any evidence of their training. Their conditions were a violation of Title IX, and the athletes wanted to do something about it.
The protest was successful by a number of measures: the Yale women’s rowing program got the showers, bathrooms, and locker rooms they demanded; the university hired a faculty member to oversee Title IX compliance; nationwide, universities hurried away to engender Title IX equitability within their own athletic programming. “They found, magically, the money,” Ernst told me. “The university finally had to realize they're gonna have to have a program for women; they're gonna have to actually acknowledge and obey Title IX.” Revealing themselves had worked, and the Yale women produced a kind of public-facing vulnerability that’s often needed to create broader social change.
Levy-Uyeda, Ray. “Yale Rowers Broke Barries Thanks to Title IX.” Global Sport Matters, June 21, 2022. https://globalsportmatters.com/culture/2020/09/24/women-broke-barriers-bodies-title-ix/.
Questions:
The protest was successful by a number of measures: the Yale women’s rowing program got the showers, bathrooms, and locker rooms they demanded; the university hired a faculty member to oversee Title IX compliance; nationwide, universities hurried away to engender Title IX equitability within their own athletic programming. “They found, magically, the money,” Ernst told me. “The university finally had to realize they're gonna have to have a program for women; they're gonna have to actually acknowledge and obey Title IX.” Revealing themselves had worked, and the Yale women produced a kind of public-facing vulnerability that’s often needed to create broader social change.
Levy-Uyeda, Ray. “Yale Rowers Broke Barries Thanks to Title IX.” Global Sport Matters, June 21, 2022. https://globalsportmatters.com/culture/2020/09/24/women-broke-barriers-bodies-title-ix/.
Questions:
- Based on this explanation of events, how was Title IX used?
Julie Johnson: Grove City Bill
[E]ven with popular legislation, benefiting women, minorities, older Americans and people with physical disabilities, many lawmakers, particularly Republicans up for re-election, face a tough choice: A vote to override places them squarely against a still-popular President, and against other interest groups that are also powerful.
The bill passed Congress overwhelmingly… Mr. Reagan, who has introduced an alternative civil rights package, acknowledges that the Supreme Court ruling went too far in limiting Federal antidiscrimination laws, but he contends that the Congressional remedy goes too far in the other direction. The Supreme Court ruled that antidiscrimination provisions on the use of Federal aid apply only to specific programs, not to an entire institution. It held that discrimination in a Grove City College sports program did not justify the denial of Federal aid outside that program.
Although the four-year liberal arts institution did not receive any direct Federal funds, it did enroll students who received federally-backed stipends or grants. The college became entangled in a legal battle with the Government when it separated boys and girls in the school's intramural sports program and refused to file a statement of compliance with Title IX.. The High Court stipulated that it was only the school's financial aid program that was covered by discrimination statutes.
That logic, critics feared, would leave huge loopholes for institutions, and not only schools, to discriminate on the basis of sex, age, race or physical handicaps. The debate has only intensified since 1984…
The conservative Christian groups offer two main objections. For one, they say provisions of the law that bar discrimination against the handicapped are unclear, and some evangelicals assert that the definition could be interpreted to include homosexuals and other groups without physical or mental disabilities. They are also worried about exemptions for religious schools… A widely distributed lobbying letter mailed by the Rev. Jerry Falwell states: “Because of the pressure brought on by the homosexual movement in this country, Congress has caved in to this pressure and passed a law that, combined with present court cases, would qualify drug addicts, alcoholics, active homosexuals, transvestites, among others, for Federal protection as handicapped.”
Johnson, Julie. “Washington Talk: Congress; Foes of Civil Rights Bill Mount 11th-Hour Drive.” The New York Times. The New York Times, March 22, 1988. https://www.nytimes.com/1988/03/22/us/washington-talk-congress-foes-of-civil-rights-bill-mount-11th-hour-drive.html?searchResultPosition=7.
Questions:
The bill passed Congress overwhelmingly… Mr. Reagan, who has introduced an alternative civil rights package, acknowledges that the Supreme Court ruling went too far in limiting Federal antidiscrimination laws, but he contends that the Congressional remedy goes too far in the other direction. The Supreme Court ruled that antidiscrimination provisions on the use of Federal aid apply only to specific programs, not to an entire institution. It held that discrimination in a Grove City College sports program did not justify the denial of Federal aid outside that program.
Although the four-year liberal arts institution did not receive any direct Federal funds, it did enroll students who received federally-backed stipends or grants. The college became entangled in a legal battle with the Government when it separated boys and girls in the school's intramural sports program and refused to file a statement of compliance with Title IX.. The High Court stipulated that it was only the school's financial aid program that was covered by discrimination statutes.
That logic, critics feared, would leave huge loopholes for institutions, and not only schools, to discriminate on the basis of sex, age, race or physical handicaps. The debate has only intensified since 1984…
The conservative Christian groups offer two main objections. For one, they say provisions of the law that bar discrimination against the handicapped are unclear, and some evangelicals assert that the definition could be interpreted to include homosexuals and other groups without physical or mental disabilities. They are also worried about exemptions for religious schools… A widely distributed lobbying letter mailed by the Rev. Jerry Falwell states: “Because of the pressure brought on by the homosexual movement in this country, Congress has caved in to this pressure and passed a law that, combined with present court cases, would qualify drug addicts, alcoholics, active homosexuals, transvestites, among others, for Federal protection as handicapped.”
Johnson, Julie. “Washington Talk: Congress; Foes of Civil Rights Bill Mount 11th-Hour Drive.” The New York Times. The New York Times, March 22, 1988. https://www.nytimes.com/1988/03/22/us/washington-talk-congress-foes-of-civil-rights-bill-mount-11th-hour-drive.html?searchResultPosition=7.
Questions:
- Based on this document, how did this event change the way Title IX was handled?
Linda Greenhouse: Court Opens A Path For Students in Sex-Bias cases
The Supreme Court ruled today that the Federal law barring sex discrimination in schools and colleges permits students to sue for damages for sexual harassment and other forms of sex discrimination. In a surprisingly broad 9-to-0 decision, the Court rejected the Bush Administration's argument that the law, Title IX of a 1972 education law, did not authorize monetary damages as a remedy for illegal discrimination.
In several recent cases, the Supreme Court has taken a narrow view of Federal civil rights laws, so lawyers for women's groups expressed relief about today's decision and praised it. They predicted that it would convert the little-used 20-year-old law into a powerful new weapon against sex discrimination on campus. "Having a real remedy will give an enormous push for equity," Marcia Greenberger, director of the National Women's Law Center, said in an interview. She saw the decision as a victory "that opens up Title IX dramatically" and will promote more fairness in schools and colleges.
Until now, there have been few lawsuits under Title IX. Although it is impossible to predict whether today's ruling will increase the number significantly, there is no doubt that it offers a specific new remedy to students -- men as well as women -- who feel they have been the victims of sex bias. But it was not immediately clear whether the ruling can be applied retroactively.
The new civil rights law that was passed in the last session of Congress made damages for sex discrimination available for the first time. But that law applies only in the context of employment discrimination and so does not apply to students.
The decision today overturned a ruling by a Federal appeals court in Atlanta. That court had dismissed a Title IX suit against a Georgia school district brought by a high school student who charged that school officials had failed to stop a teacher from forcing unwanted sexual attention on her for more than a year.
Greenhouse, Linda. “Court Opens Path for Student Suits in Sex-Bias Cases.” The New York Times. The New York Times, February 27, 1992. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/27/us/court-opens-path-for-student-suits-in-sex-bias-cases.html#:~:text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20ruled%20today,other%20forms%20of%20sex%20discrimination.
Questions:
In several recent cases, the Supreme Court has taken a narrow view of Federal civil rights laws, so lawyers for women's groups expressed relief about today's decision and praised it. They predicted that it would convert the little-used 20-year-old law into a powerful new weapon against sex discrimination on campus. "Having a real remedy will give an enormous push for equity," Marcia Greenberger, director of the National Women's Law Center, said in an interview. She saw the decision as a victory "that opens up Title IX dramatically" and will promote more fairness in schools and colleges.
Until now, there have been few lawsuits under Title IX. Although it is impossible to predict whether today's ruling will increase the number significantly, there is no doubt that it offers a specific new remedy to students -- men as well as women -- who feel they have been the victims of sex bias. But it was not immediately clear whether the ruling can be applied retroactively.
The new civil rights law that was passed in the last session of Congress made damages for sex discrimination available for the first time. But that law applies only in the context of employment discrimination and so does not apply to students.
The decision today overturned a ruling by a Federal appeals court in Atlanta. That court had dismissed a Title IX suit against a Georgia school district brought by a high school student who charged that school officials had failed to stop a teacher from forcing unwanted sexual attention on her for more than a year.
Greenhouse, Linda. “Court Opens Path for Student Suits in Sex-Bias Cases.” The New York Times. The New York Times, February 27, 1992. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/27/us/court-opens-path-for-student-suits-in-sex-bias-cases.html#:~:text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20ruled%20today,other%20forms%20of%20sex%20discrimination.
Questions:
- Based on this document, how did this event change the way Title IX was handled?
Alan Blinder and Erik Eckholm: Federal Judge Blocks Transgender Bathroom Access
A federal judge has blocked the Obama administration from enforcing new guidelines that were intended to expand restroom access for transgender students across the country.
Judge Reed O’Connor of the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas said in a 38-page ruling, which he said should apply nationwide, that the government had not complied with federal law when it issued “directives which contradict the existing legislative and regulatory text.”
The judge’s order on Sunday, in a case brought by officials from more than a dozen states, was a victory for social conservatives in the continuing legal battles over the restroom guidelines, which the federal government issued this year. The culture war over the rights of transgender people, and especially their right to use public bathrooms consistent with their gender identities, has emerged as an emotional cause among social conservatives.
The Obama administration’s assertion that the rights of transgender people in public schools and workplaces are protected under existing laws against sex discrimination has been condemned by social conservatives, who said the administration was illegally intruding into local affairs and promoting a policy that would jeopardize the privacy and safety of schoolchildren.
Eckholm, Erik, and Alan Blinder. “Federal Transgender Bathroom Access Guidelines Blocked by Judge.” The New York Times. The New York Times, August 22, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/us/transgender-bathroom-access-guidelines-blocked-by-judge.html.
Questions:
Judge Reed O’Connor of the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas said in a 38-page ruling, which he said should apply nationwide, that the government had not complied with federal law when it issued “directives which contradict the existing legislative and regulatory text.”
The judge’s order on Sunday, in a case brought by officials from more than a dozen states, was a victory for social conservatives in the continuing legal battles over the restroom guidelines, which the federal government issued this year. The culture war over the rights of transgender people, and especially their right to use public bathrooms consistent with their gender identities, has emerged as an emotional cause among social conservatives.
The Obama administration’s assertion that the rights of transgender people in public schools and workplaces are protected under existing laws against sex discrimination has been condemned by social conservatives, who said the administration was illegally intruding into local affairs and promoting a policy that would jeopardize the privacy and safety of schoolchildren.
Eckholm, Erik, and Alan Blinder. “Federal Transgender Bathroom Access Guidelines Blocked by Judge.” The New York Times. The New York Times, August 22, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/us/transgender-bathroom-access-guidelines-blocked-by-judge.html.
Questions:
- Based on this document, how did this event change the way Title IX was handled?
Bianca Quilantan: Devos Reveals Rules That Boost Rights For Students Accused Of Sexual-Misconduct
Schools and colleges face a major overhaul in how they handle sexual misconduct allegations after Education Secretary Betsy DeVos on Wednesday rebuffed calls to delay the sweeping regulation until the conclusion of the national coronavirus emergency. The Title IX rule will offer new rights to accused assailants, and require colleges to respond to formal complaints with courtroom-like hearings. The hearings, which will allow representatives for alleged offenders and victims to call witnesses and challenge their credibility, can occur live or virtually. Students and staff would also have a right to appeal a school’s decisions.
President Donald Trump, conservatives and some civil liberties groups praised the changes as a boon to due process. But the new rule prompted hostile rebukes from Democrats, prominent higher education leaders and advocacy groups who promised a fight, including in the courts.
To investigate and make decisions on complaints, schools will have to use trained personnel to evaluate evidence, though they could offer “informal resolution” options to involved individuals. Schools will also have their choice of using two standards of evidence to make decisions: a “clear and convincing” standard or a less-restrictive standard that relies on the “preponderance of evidence.”
DeVos said that the rule came after years of research and input, and will ensure a process for deciding claims that is fair to all students. “We can and must continue to fight sexual misconduct in our nation’s schools, and this rule makes certain that fight continues,” DeVos said.
The Obama administration had laid out guidance pushing schools to resolve an epidemic of complaints of sexual assault and harassment. But DeVos scrapped the Obama-era policies, saying they were unfair to everyone involved, and she now wants to balance the scales of justice with clear, formal rules.
The White House described the policy change as a way to"restore fairness and due process to our campuses,” arguing that colleges and universities “have often stacked the deck against the accused, failing to offer protections such as a presumption of innocence or adequate ability to rebut allegations.” “With today’s action and every action to come, the Trump administration will fight for America’s students,” Trump said in a statement. The regulations are effective Aug. 14, 2020.
Quilantan , Bianca. “Devos Unveils Rule That Boosts Rights for Students Accused of Sexual Misconduct.” POLITICO, May 6, 2020. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/06/betsy-devos-sexual-misconduct-rule-schools-240131.
Questions:
President Donald Trump, conservatives and some civil liberties groups praised the changes as a boon to due process. But the new rule prompted hostile rebukes from Democrats, prominent higher education leaders and advocacy groups who promised a fight, including in the courts.
To investigate and make decisions on complaints, schools will have to use trained personnel to evaluate evidence, though they could offer “informal resolution” options to involved individuals. Schools will also have their choice of using two standards of evidence to make decisions: a “clear and convincing” standard or a less-restrictive standard that relies on the “preponderance of evidence.”
DeVos said that the rule came after years of research and input, and will ensure a process for deciding claims that is fair to all students. “We can and must continue to fight sexual misconduct in our nation’s schools, and this rule makes certain that fight continues,” DeVos said.
The Obama administration had laid out guidance pushing schools to resolve an epidemic of complaints of sexual assault and harassment. But DeVos scrapped the Obama-era policies, saying they were unfair to everyone involved, and she now wants to balance the scales of justice with clear, formal rules.
The White House described the policy change as a way to"restore fairness and due process to our campuses,” arguing that colleges and universities “have often stacked the deck against the accused, failing to offer protections such as a presumption of innocence or adequate ability to rebut allegations.” “With today’s action and every action to come, the Trump administration will fight for America’s students,” Trump said in a statement. The regulations are effective Aug. 14, 2020.
Quilantan , Bianca. “Devos Unveils Rule That Boosts Rights for Students Accused of Sexual Misconduct.” POLITICO, May 6, 2020. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/06/betsy-devos-sexual-misconduct-rule-schools-240131.
Questions:
- Based on this document, how did this event change the way Title IX was handled?
Dustin Jones: Biden's Title IX Reforms Would Roll Back Trump-Era Rules, Expand Victim Protections
President Biden and the Department of Education announced proposed amendments to the legislation that would reinstate victim protections that were rolled back by President Donald Trump. The Department of Education said the amendments will include clarifying text to include protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity to strengthen the rights of LGBTQI+ students. "They would make clear that preventing someone from participating in school programs and activities consistent with their gender identity would cause harm in violation of Title IX, except in some limited areas set out in the statute or regulations," the department said.
The department also said it plans to issue a separate notice of proposed rulemaking to address whether and how the agency should amend the Title IX regulations to address students' eligibility to participate on a particular male or female athletics team. Amendments will also include language to prevent discrimination base on sex stereotypes and pregnancy, the department said. It would require schools to provide reasonable modifications for pregnant students and reasonable break time for pregnant employees as well as lactation spaces.
And parents, guardians and a student's authorized legal representative would have greater protections to act on a student's behalf. That would allow these parties to seek assistance under Title IX and participate in grievance procedures, the department said…
Under the Trump-era regulations, some forms of sex-based harassment weren't considered to be Title IX violations. But the proposed changes, which will undergo a public comment period before being finalized, will include all "unwelcome sex-based conduct that creates a hostile environment by denying or limiting a person's ability to participate in or benefit from a school's education program or activity."
The Trump administration's version of Title IX, which remains in place until the amendments are approved, only requires educational institutions to investigate formal sexual harassment complaints. The Department of Education said it would keep as much of the current regulation as possible to ensure consistency, but Biden's changes would require schools to investigate all complaints.
Jones, Dustin. “Biden's Title IX Reforms Would Roll Back Trump-Era Rules, Expand Victim Protections.” NPR. NPR, June 23, 2022. https://www.npr.org/2022/06/23/1107045291/title-ix-9-biden-expand-victim-protections-discrimination.
Questions:
The department also said it plans to issue a separate notice of proposed rulemaking to address whether and how the agency should amend the Title IX regulations to address students' eligibility to participate on a particular male or female athletics team. Amendments will also include language to prevent discrimination base on sex stereotypes and pregnancy, the department said. It would require schools to provide reasonable modifications for pregnant students and reasonable break time for pregnant employees as well as lactation spaces.
And parents, guardians and a student's authorized legal representative would have greater protections to act on a student's behalf. That would allow these parties to seek assistance under Title IX and participate in grievance procedures, the department said…
Under the Trump-era regulations, some forms of sex-based harassment weren't considered to be Title IX violations. But the proposed changes, which will undergo a public comment period before being finalized, will include all "unwelcome sex-based conduct that creates a hostile environment by denying or limiting a person's ability to participate in or benefit from a school's education program or activity."
The Trump administration's version of Title IX, which remains in place until the amendments are approved, only requires educational institutions to investigate formal sexual harassment complaints. The Department of Education said it would keep as much of the current regulation as possible to ensure consistency, but Biden's changes would require schools to investigate all complaints.
Jones, Dustin. “Biden's Title IX Reforms Would Roll Back Trump-Era Rules, Expand Victim Protections.” NPR. NPR, June 23, 2022. https://www.npr.org/2022/06/23/1107045291/title-ix-9-biden-expand-victim-protections-discrimination.
Questions:
- Based on this document, how did this event change the way Title IX was handled?
Remy Tumin: Title IX Gave Women Greater Access to Education
On June 23, 1972, President Richard M. Nixon signed an omnibus education bill that would change the paths of millions of women and girls in the United States. At first glance, the sweep conveyed by the words themselves can be hard to recognize. Title IX was part of a long list of education amendments in the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act of 1965, buried amid antibusing policies and outlines of federal financial aid funding. In just 37 words, the statute guaranteed a means to ensure equal access for women to education…
Lawmakers used the Civil Rights Act for framing but intentionally downplayed the policy’s significance to assure its passage through Congress. Fifty years later, Title IX continues to reverberate around the country, ushering in a new era of women’s sports and a framework for handling sexual misconduct complaints on campus.
“Part of the beauty of Title IX is its breadth and comprehensiveness. It’s a ban without creating an exhaustive list,” said Wendy Mink, whose mother, Rep. Patsy Mink, Democrat of Hawaii, was one of the lawmakers to spearhead the policy. The official name of Title IX was changed to the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act after Mink’s death in 2002. “It’s open to interpretation and application,” Wendy Mink said. “She wanted to make sure each of the interpretations would not only be applied but enforced.”
The most visible changes were seen in gymnasiums, fields and courts across the United States — young women were entitled to the same athletic opportunities as their male counterparts at schools. According to a study by the Women’s Sports Foundation, high school participation rose from 294,015 in the 1971-72 school year to 3.4 million in 2018-19 (participation by boys was 3.67 million in 1971-72 and 4.53 million in 2018-19). At the collegiate level, participation at N.C.A.A. schools rose from 29,977 athletes in women’s sports in 1971-72 to 215,486 in 2020-21. Men’s sports had 275,769 athletes in 2020-21.
What’s missing from Title IX?
While Title IX’s intentions to be broad and encompassing have ensured rights for many women and girls, white women have benefited the most. Title IX does not directly address race, gender identity, disabilities or other characteristics besides sex. The Women’s Sports Foundation found that Asian, Black, Indigenous, Hispanic and other girls and women of color participate in sport at lower levels than white women do. The same was true for women with disabilities compared with men who had disabilities. Women of color are also underrepresented in athletic leadership.
A new interpretation of Title IX includes transgender students and new sexual assault guidelines. Title IX falls under the executive branch and therefore is subject to interpretation by each administration. The Biden administration proposed new rules on Thursday that would extend Title IX protections to transgender students by expanding the definition of “sex” to include “stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity.” The new language, which is still subject to a commentary period, also rolled back a Trump administration policy that narrowed the scope of campus sexual misconduct investigations. The Biden administration maintained that the current rules “weakened protections for survivors of sexual assault and diminished the promise of an education free from discrimination.”
As proposed, the guidance would officially make protecting transgender students a federal legal requirement of Title IX. However, the Education Department said its guidelines for sports would be crafted separately. Miguel A. Cardona, the education secretary, said Thursday that its goal was to create rules for how schools can determine eligibility for sports teams “while upholding Title IX’s nondiscrimination guarantee.” But he declined to give details about how those rules would be determined.
The proposed changes come amid highly contentious debate throughout the sports world about whether transgender women should be allowed to compete in women’s divisions. Some major sports federations have heavily restricted transgender women from competing in women’s divisions. FINA, the world governing body for swimming, voted to prohibit transgender women from competing unless they began medical treatments to suppress production of testosterone before going through one of the early stages of puberty, or by age 12, whichever occurred later. It established one of the strictest rules against transgender participation in international sports.
Nearly 20 states have enacted laws or issued statewide rules that bar or limit transgender sports participation. Title IX, for now, is unlikely to be used specifically by lawmakers either to push for more inclusion or exclusion of transgender women in women’s divisions. The law, an education policy at its core, enjoys broad support by the public and both Republican and Democrat lawmakers.
Tumin, Remy. “Title IX Gave Women Greater Access to Education. Here’s What It Says and Does. The law has grown participation for women and girls in sports and has had other significant ramifications, too.” New York Times. June 22, 2022. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/22/sports/what-is-title-ix.html.
Questions:
Lawmakers used the Civil Rights Act for framing but intentionally downplayed the policy’s significance to assure its passage through Congress. Fifty years later, Title IX continues to reverberate around the country, ushering in a new era of women’s sports and a framework for handling sexual misconduct complaints on campus.
“Part of the beauty of Title IX is its breadth and comprehensiveness. It’s a ban without creating an exhaustive list,” said Wendy Mink, whose mother, Rep. Patsy Mink, Democrat of Hawaii, was one of the lawmakers to spearhead the policy. The official name of Title IX was changed to the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act after Mink’s death in 2002. “It’s open to interpretation and application,” Wendy Mink said. “She wanted to make sure each of the interpretations would not only be applied but enforced.”
The most visible changes were seen in gymnasiums, fields and courts across the United States — young women were entitled to the same athletic opportunities as their male counterparts at schools. According to a study by the Women’s Sports Foundation, high school participation rose from 294,015 in the 1971-72 school year to 3.4 million in 2018-19 (participation by boys was 3.67 million in 1971-72 and 4.53 million in 2018-19). At the collegiate level, participation at N.C.A.A. schools rose from 29,977 athletes in women’s sports in 1971-72 to 215,486 in 2020-21. Men’s sports had 275,769 athletes in 2020-21.
What’s missing from Title IX?
While Title IX’s intentions to be broad and encompassing have ensured rights for many women and girls, white women have benefited the most. Title IX does not directly address race, gender identity, disabilities or other characteristics besides sex. The Women’s Sports Foundation found that Asian, Black, Indigenous, Hispanic and other girls and women of color participate in sport at lower levels than white women do. The same was true for women with disabilities compared with men who had disabilities. Women of color are also underrepresented in athletic leadership.
A new interpretation of Title IX includes transgender students and new sexual assault guidelines. Title IX falls under the executive branch and therefore is subject to interpretation by each administration. The Biden administration proposed new rules on Thursday that would extend Title IX protections to transgender students by expanding the definition of “sex” to include “stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity.” The new language, which is still subject to a commentary period, also rolled back a Trump administration policy that narrowed the scope of campus sexual misconduct investigations. The Biden administration maintained that the current rules “weakened protections for survivors of sexual assault and diminished the promise of an education free from discrimination.”
As proposed, the guidance would officially make protecting transgender students a federal legal requirement of Title IX. However, the Education Department said its guidelines for sports would be crafted separately. Miguel A. Cardona, the education secretary, said Thursday that its goal was to create rules for how schools can determine eligibility for sports teams “while upholding Title IX’s nondiscrimination guarantee.” But he declined to give details about how those rules would be determined.
The proposed changes come amid highly contentious debate throughout the sports world about whether transgender women should be allowed to compete in women’s divisions. Some major sports federations have heavily restricted transgender women from competing in women’s divisions. FINA, the world governing body for swimming, voted to prohibit transgender women from competing unless they began medical treatments to suppress production of testosterone before going through one of the early stages of puberty, or by age 12, whichever occurred later. It established one of the strictest rules against transgender participation in international sports.
Nearly 20 states have enacted laws or issued statewide rules that bar or limit transgender sports participation. Title IX, for now, is unlikely to be used specifically by lawmakers either to push for more inclusion or exclusion of transgender women in women’s divisions. The law, an education policy at its core, enjoys broad support by the public and both Republican and Democrat lawmakers.
Tumin, Remy. “Title IX Gave Women Greater Access to Education. Here’s What It Says and Does. The law has grown participation for women and girls in sports and has had other significant ramifications, too.” New York Times. June 22, 2022. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/22/sports/what-is-title-ix.html.
Questions:
- Based on the primary and secondary material, how has TITLE IX changed overtime?
DOMA
Defense of Marriage Act
H.R. 3396. Defense of Marriage Act. 1996.
Questions:
Questions:
- What is the Defense of Marriage Act?
- How does the Act define marriage?
- What does this act mean for same-gender couples?
Andrea Bernstein: Hilary Clinton’s Gay Marriage Evolution
In the midst of her senate campaign in 2000, Hilary Clinton’s position on DOMA, a law her husband signed into effect, came under fire. In this document, a reporter who interviewed her then and over the course of her career as a Senator, Secretary of State, and presidential candidate described her early position.
I found myself covering Hillary Clinton’s run for U.S. Senate in New York, the birthplace of the gay rights movement. And her views on DOMA were a lingering mystery.
Hillary… held her first extended question-and-answer session with reporters in a cold January day. The first question was about a custody dispute involving a Cuban boy, Elian Gonzalez. The second was mine: If she were a senator, would she vote for DOMA?
"The Defense of Marriage Act has already been before the Senate," Clinton pushed back. "What I’m concerned about is what’s going to happen at the state level." She went on to express her support for partnership benefits, not marriage. I pressed. Did you agree with Mr. Clinton on DOMA or not?
"He was against it, yeah, I agree with that. But it's moot. It’s already been through the Senate." Then The New York Times' Adam Nagourney and I shot back. "But he signed it. He signed it."
"He signed it," Clinton agreed. "But he signed it because it was something the Congress said, 'Take it or leave it. You’re going to have to do it.' They would have passed it over his veto."
Listening back to that tape — recorded on a long-gone cassette recorder — it's hard to believe how many questions Clinton took on the issue, until she eventually cried uncle. "I would have voted for it at that time but I think to go back and talk about DOMA now especially...is something that is divisive."
So then, why was she against gay marriage? Here's the part of her answer that later became famous. "Because I believe marriage means something different. Marriage is about a historic, religious and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been between a man and a woman."
To be fair, at the time, not one major elected official in either party supported gay marriage, including Bernie Sanders.
Bernstein, Andrea. “The Tale of the Tape: Hillary Clinton's Gay Marriage Evolution.” WNYC News. November 3, 2015. https://www.wnyc.org/story/tale-tape-hillary-clintons-gay-evolution/.
I found myself covering Hillary Clinton’s run for U.S. Senate in New York, the birthplace of the gay rights movement. And her views on DOMA were a lingering mystery.
Hillary… held her first extended question-and-answer session with reporters in a cold January day. The first question was about a custody dispute involving a Cuban boy, Elian Gonzalez. The second was mine: If she were a senator, would she vote for DOMA?
"The Defense of Marriage Act has already been before the Senate," Clinton pushed back. "What I’m concerned about is what’s going to happen at the state level." She went on to express her support for partnership benefits, not marriage. I pressed. Did you agree with Mr. Clinton on DOMA or not?
"He was against it, yeah, I agree with that. But it's moot. It’s already been through the Senate." Then The New York Times' Adam Nagourney and I shot back. "But he signed it. He signed it."
"He signed it," Clinton agreed. "But he signed it because it was something the Congress said, 'Take it or leave it. You’re going to have to do it.' They would have passed it over his veto."
Listening back to that tape — recorded on a long-gone cassette recorder — it's hard to believe how many questions Clinton took on the issue, until she eventually cried uncle. "I would have voted for it at that time but I think to go back and talk about DOMA now especially...is something that is divisive."
So then, why was she against gay marriage? Here's the part of her answer that later became famous. "Because I believe marriage means something different. Marriage is about a historic, religious and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been between a man and a woman."
To be fair, at the time, not one major elected official in either party supported gay marriage, including Bernie Sanders.
Bernstein, Andrea. “The Tale of the Tape: Hillary Clinton's Gay Marriage Evolution.” WNYC News. November 3, 2015. https://www.wnyc.org/story/tale-tape-hillary-clintons-gay-evolution/.
Anthony Kennedy: Excerpt From The Majority Opinion in US vs Windsor
In 2013, in a Supreme Court case, United States v. Windsor, the Court held that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal recognition of same-sex marriages, was a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
DOMA’s principal effect is to identify a subset of state-sanctioned marriages and make them unequal. The principal purpose is to impose inequality, not for other reasons like governmental efficiency. Responsibilities, as well as rights, enhance the dignity and integrity of the person. And DOMA contrives to deprive some couples married under the laws of their State, but not other couples, of both rights and responsibilities. By creating two contradictory marriage regimes within the same State, DOMA forces same-sex couples to live as married for the purpose of state law but unmarried for the purpose of federal law, thus diminishing the stability and predictability of basic personal relations the State has found it proper to acknowledge and protect. By this dynamic DOMA undermines both the public and private significance of state-sanctioned same-sex marriages; for it tells those couples, and all the world, that their otherwise valid marriages are unworthy of federal recognition. This places same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage. The differentiation demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects, see Lawrence, 539 U. S. 558, and whose relationship the State has sought to dignify. And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples. The law in question makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives. Under DOMA, same-sex married couples have their lives burdened, by reason of government decree, in visible and public ways.
The power the Constitution grants it also restrains. And though Congress has great authority to design laws to fit its own conception of sound national policy, it cannot deny the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. What has been explained to this point should more than suffice to establish that the principal purpose and the necessary effect of this law are to demean those persons who are in a lawful same-sex marriage. This requires the Court to hold, as it now does, that DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.
Kennedy , Anthony. “United States vs Windsor .” Supreme Court of the United States, June 26, 2013. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf.
Question: What is Kennedy’s main argument?
DOMA’s principal effect is to identify a subset of state-sanctioned marriages and make them unequal. The principal purpose is to impose inequality, not for other reasons like governmental efficiency. Responsibilities, as well as rights, enhance the dignity and integrity of the person. And DOMA contrives to deprive some couples married under the laws of their State, but not other couples, of both rights and responsibilities. By creating two contradictory marriage regimes within the same State, DOMA forces same-sex couples to live as married for the purpose of state law but unmarried for the purpose of federal law, thus diminishing the stability and predictability of basic personal relations the State has found it proper to acknowledge and protect. By this dynamic DOMA undermines both the public and private significance of state-sanctioned same-sex marriages; for it tells those couples, and all the world, that their otherwise valid marriages are unworthy of federal recognition. This places same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage. The differentiation demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects, see Lawrence, 539 U. S. 558, and whose relationship the State has sought to dignify. And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples. The law in question makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives. Under DOMA, same-sex married couples have their lives burdened, by reason of government decree, in visible and public ways.
The power the Constitution grants it also restrains. And though Congress has great authority to design laws to fit its own conception of sound national policy, it cannot deny the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. What has been explained to this point should more than suffice to establish that the principal purpose and the necessary effect of this law are to demean those persons who are in a lawful same-sex marriage. This requires the Court to hold, as it now does, that DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.
Kennedy , Anthony. “United States vs Windsor .” Supreme Court of the United States, June 26, 2013. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf.
Question: What is Kennedy’s main argument?
Antonin Scalia: Dissenting Opinion of Justice Scalia US vs Windsor
The Court is eager—hungry—to tell everyone its view of the legal question at the heart of this case. Standing in the way is an obstacle, a technicality of little interest to anyone but the people of We the People, who created it as a barrier against judges’ intrusion into their lives. They gave judges, in Article III, only the “Judicial Power,” a power to decide not abstract questions but real, concrete “Cases” and “Controversies”… What, then, are we doing here? The answer lies at the heart of the jurisdictional portion of today’s opinion, where a single sentence lays bare the majority’s vision of our role. The Court says that we have the power to decide this case because if we did not, then our “primary role in determining the constitutionality of a law” … would “become only secondary to the President’s.” But wait, the reader wonders—Windsor won below, and so cured her injury, and the President was glad to see it. True, says the majority, but the judicial review must march on regardless, lest we “undermine the clear dictate of the separation-of-powers principle that when an Act of Congress is alleged to conflict with the Constitution, it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”
Neither party sought to undo the judgment for Windsor, and so that court should have dismissed the appeal (just as we should dismiss) for lack of jurisdiction. Since both parties agreed with the judgment of the District Court for the Southern District of New York, the suit should have ended there.
Scalia , Antonin. “United States vs Windsor .” Supreme Court of the United States, June 26, 2013. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf.
Question:
Neither party sought to undo the judgment for Windsor, and so that court should have dismissed the appeal (just as we should dismiss) for lack of jurisdiction. Since both parties agreed with the judgment of the District Court for the Southern District of New York, the suit should have ended there.
Scalia , Antonin. “United States vs Windsor .” Supreme Court of the United States, June 26, 2013. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf.
Question:
- What is Scalia’s main argument?
Edith Windsor: LGBTQ Advocate Who Fought The Defense Of Marriage Act, Dies At 88
Emmanuelle Levine: On Edith Windsor, SCOTUS, and the Joys of Becoming a Person
It was that fairly unromantic, upper-middle class issue that led Edie to sue. In 2013, she won, and DOMA was overturned. In 2015, “Obergefell v. Hodges” cracked open the marriage piñata for the 37 states plus the territories that were left. That was the end of the story as I heard it in high school Gay-Straight Alliance meetings. Edie helped us win marriage, end of discussion. But of course, marriage wasn’t and isn’t the Final Boss of queer civil rights.
Edie wasn’t a perfect icon — she wasn’t especially intersectional in her approach to the movement. You’ll notice I said “gay rights” and not “LGBT rights” or even “queer justice.” A lot of people will argue that the marriage fight wasn’t the best use of our resources as a queer community, that we should have focused on employment and housing discrimination, hate crimes against transgender people of color, Title IX protections, mass incarceration and homelessness. The particular privilege of marriage that Edie sued for benefited a lot of middle-and upper-class people — estate tax exemptions are regressive; that is, they benefit rich people more than everyone else…
It is a great privilege to have marked my childhood by civil rights battles won. A privilege of being born in the right place at the right time, sure, but mostly a privilege in that a lot of people poured a lot of resources into fighting for rights that would affect me… I’m grateful to Edie for Doing the Work on my behalf. She gave me the great joy and privilege of feeling like a person. Her death is a blow, but it also opens a vacancy for me — there’s an open spot to fill in the phalanx of those who defend civil rights. In gratitude to Edie, and in the hope that more of us get to experience the exhilaration of being seen as people, I recommit to trying to fill in the battle line.
Levine , Emmanuelle. “On Edith Windsor, Scotus, and the Joys of Becoming a Person .” Yale Daily News, September 29, 2017. https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2017/09/29/142220/.
Questions:
Edie wasn’t a perfect icon — she wasn’t especially intersectional in her approach to the movement. You’ll notice I said “gay rights” and not “LGBT rights” or even “queer justice.” A lot of people will argue that the marriage fight wasn’t the best use of our resources as a queer community, that we should have focused on employment and housing discrimination, hate crimes against transgender people of color, Title IX protections, mass incarceration and homelessness. The particular privilege of marriage that Edie sued for benefited a lot of middle-and upper-class people — estate tax exemptions are regressive; that is, they benefit rich people more than everyone else…
It is a great privilege to have marked my childhood by civil rights battles won. A privilege of being born in the right place at the right time, sure, but mostly a privilege in that a lot of people poured a lot of resources into fighting for rights that would affect me… I’m grateful to Edie for Doing the Work on my behalf. She gave me the great joy and privilege of feeling like a person. Her death is a blow, but it also opens a vacancy for me — there’s an open spot to fill in the phalanx of those who defend civil rights. In gratitude to Edie, and in the hope that more of us get to experience the exhilaration of being seen as people, I recommit to trying to fill in the battle line.
Levine , Emmanuelle. “On Edith Windsor, Scotus, and the Joys of Becoming a Person .” Yale Daily News, September 29, 2017. https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2017/09/29/142220/.
Questions:
- Why did Levine NOT consider Windsor a LGBTQ+ advocate and instead described her as a “gay rights” advocate?
- What other concerns did she have about Windsor’s limited advocacy?
- How long did Windsor live a rather closeted life?
- What impact did Windsor have on Levine’s life?
Remedial Herstory Editors. "26. MODERN WOMEN." The Remedial Herstory Project. July 12, 2023. www.remedialherstory.com.
Primary AUTHOR: |
Dr. Alicia Guitierrez-Romine
|
Primary ReviewerS: |
Kelsie Brook Eckert
|
|
Consulting TeamKelsie Brook Eckert, Project Director
Coordinator of Social Studies Education at Plymouth State University Dr. Barbara Tischler, Consultant Professor of History Hunter College and Columbia University Dr. Alicia Gutierrez-Romine, Consultant Assistant Professor of History at La Sierra University Jacqui Nelson, Consultant Teaching Lecturer of Military History at Plymouth State University Dr. Deanna Beachley Professor of History and Women's Studies at College of Southern Nevada |
EditorsAlice Stanley
ReviewersColonial
Dr. Margaret Huettl Hannah Dutton Dr. John Krueckeberg 19th Century Dr. Rebecca Noel Michelle Stonis, MA Annabelle L. Blevins Pifer, MA Cony Marquez, PhD Candidate 20th Century Dr. Tanya Roth Dr. Jessica Frazier Mary Bezbatchenko, MA Dr. Alicia Gutierrez-Romine Matthew Cerjak |
"No matter how wise a mother's advice is, we listen to our peers." At least that's writer Naomi Wolf's take on the differences between her generation of feminists―the third wave―and the feminists who came before her and developed in the late '60s and '70s―the second wave. In Not My Mother's Sister, Astrid Henry agrees with Wolf that this has been the case with American feminism, but says there are problems inherent in drawing generational lines.
Second Wave feminism collapsed in the early 1980s when a universal definition of women was abandoned. At the same time, as a reaction to the narcissism of white middle class feminism, "intersectionality" led to many different feminisms according to race, sexual preference and class. These ongoing segregations make it impossible for women to unite politically and they have not ended exclusion and discrimination among women, especially in the academy. In Inclusive Feminism, Naomi Zack provides a universal, relational definition of women, critically engages both Anglo and French feminists and shows how women can become a united historical force, with the political goal of ruling in place of men.
|
The sexual politics of television culture is the territory covered by this ground-breaking book - the first to demonstrate the ways in which third wave feminist television studies approaches and illuminates mainstream TV. The book offers an exuberant and accessible discussion of what television has to offer today's feminist fan. It also sets a new tone for future debate, turning away from a sober, near-pessimistic trend in much feminist media studies to reconnect with the roots of third wave feminism in riot grrrl culture, sex-radical feminism, and black feminism, tracing too the narratives provided by queer theory in which pleasure has a less contested place.
Why should feminists care about Christianity? Why should Christians care about feminism? In Feminism and Christianity Riswold presents a collection of concise answers to basic questions like these in order to generate discussion about how the two can challenge each other and can even work together in the twenty-first century. Situated firmly in the third wave of feminist activism and scholarship as well as in contemporary Christian theology, Riswold addresses issues such as race, class, gender, and sexuality with an affirmation of tradition alongside a push for change.
|
New Blood offers a fresh interdisciplinary look at feminism-in-flux. For over three decades, menstrual activists have questioned the safety and necessity of feminine care products while contesting menstruation as a deeply entrenched taboo. Chris Bobel shows how a little-known yet enduring force in the feminist health, environmental, and consumer rights movements lays bare tensions between second- and third-wave feminisms and reveals a complicated story of continuity and change within the women's movement.
This revised and expanded edition, new in paperback, provides a definitive collection on the current period in feminism known by many as the 'third wave'. Three sections - genealogies and generations, locales and locations, politics and popular culture - interrogate the wave metaphor and, through questioning the generational account of feminism, indicate possible future trajectories for the feminist movement.
|
Feminisms in Leisure Studies acknowledges and advances the contribution of feminist theories to leisure knowledge and research. Building upon the strong history of feminist leisure scholarship, the book reviews key feminist theories and offers an overview of a fourth wave of feminism and its relevance to leisure.
Kira Cochrane’s 'All the Rebel Women' is an irrepressible exploration of today’s feminist landscape, asking how far we have come over the past century – and how far there still is to go. Whether engaging with leading feminists, describing the fight against rape culture or bringing immediate, powerful life to vital theories such as intersectionality, 'All the Rebel Women' binds everything together into one unstoppable idea. This is modern feminism. This is the fourth wave.
|
This book addresses the current resurgence of interest in feminism–notably within popular culture and media–that has led some to announce the arrival of the fourth wave. Research explores where fourth-wave feminism sits in relation to those that preceded it, and in particular, how fourth-wave feminism intersects with differing understandings of postfeminism(s).
Hip Hop Womanist writer and theologian EbonyJanice’s book of essays center a fourth wave of Womanism, dreaming, the pursuit of softness, ancestral reverence, and radical wholeness as tools of liberation. All The Black Girls Are Activists is a love letter to Black girls and Black women, asking and attempting to offer some answers to “Who would black women get to be if we did not have to create from a place of resistance?” by naming Black women’s wellness, wholeness, and survival as the radical revolution we have been waiting for.
|
This book discusses the recent re-emergence of interest in feminism in popular culture and social media which has prompted many to celebrate the events as a new wave of feminism, the fourth wave. The book takes up the debate of postfeminism and /or fourth wave and studies how the new wave intersects with the previous feminist goals. It closely studies the hashtag campaigns to trace how a generation of women are drawn into (sl)activism (slacktivism) thereby surging the resurgence.
Networked Feminism tells the story of how activists have used media to reconfigure what feminist politics and organizing look like in the United States. Drawing on years spent participating in grassroots communities and observing viral campaigns, Rosemary Clark-Parsons argues that feminists engage in a do-it-ourselves feminism characterized by the use of everyday media technologies. Faced with an electoral system and a history of collective organizing that have failed to address complex systems of oppression, do-it-ourselves feminists do not rely on political organizations, institutions, or authorities. Instead, they use digital networks to build movements that reflect their values and meet the challenges of the current moment, all the while juggling the advantages and limitations of their media tools.
|
How to teach with Films:
Remember, teachers want the student to be the historian. What do historians do when they watch films?
- Before they watch, ask students to research the director and producers. These are the source of the information. How will their background and experience likely bias this film?
- Also, ask students to consider the context the film was created in. The film may be about history, but it was made recently. What was going on the year the film was made that could bias the film? In particular, how do you think the gains of feminism will impact the portrayal of the female characters?
- As they watch, ask students to research the historical accuracy of the film. What do online sources say about what the film gets right or wrong?
- Afterward, ask students to describe how the female characters were portrayed and what lessons they got from the film.
- Then, ask students to evaluate this film as a learning tool. Was it helpful to better understand this topic? Did the historical inaccuracies make it unhelpful? Make it clear any informed opinion is valid.
|
|
|
Bombshell shows the intimate harassment by the CEO and headliner. It highlights the challenges women face coming forward in these types of toxic work environments and ways women are pitted against one another by men. No sexual activity is shown in the film, though sexual language and suggestions are shown.
IMDB. |
|
|
I, Tonya shows competitive ice skater Tonya Harding rise among the ranks at the U.S. Figure Skating Championships, but her future in the sport is thrown into doubt when her ex-husband intervenes.
IMDB. |
|
|
She said is the story of the two female reporters at the New York Times who broke the story about Harvey Weinstein's sexual violence and exploitation of young women and the system of Hollywood executives who protected him.
IMDB |
|
|
Zero Dark Thirty (2012)
A chronicle of the decade-long hunt for al-Qaeda terrorist leader Osama bin Laden after the September 2001 attacks, and his death at the hands of the Navy S.E.A.L.s Team 6 in May 2011. IMDB |
|
Bibliography
US Bureau of Labor Statistics. "Women in the Workforce: Databook." April 2021. https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/womens-databook/2020/home.htm.
Bard, Christine. "Antifeminism." Digital Encyclopedia of European History. https://ehne.fr/en/encyclopedia/authors/christine-bard.
Bauer-Wolf, Jeremy. “Mattress Protest and Its Aftermath.” Inside Higher Ed. July 23, 2017. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/07/24/media-circus-surrounding-mattress-girl-case-changed-conversation-sexual-assault.
Bergeron, Ryan. "The Seventies: Women Make Waves." CNN. August 17, 2015. https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/22/living/the-seventies-feminism-womens-lib/index.html.
Black Lives Matter. “About.” Black Lives Matter. https://blacklivesmatter.com/herstory/.
Cardin, Kelly M. and Evan B. Citron. “#MeToo and the Workplace: Five Years and a Pandemic Later.” OGLETREE. May 24, 2022. https://ogletree.com/insights/metoo-and-the-workplace-five-years-and-a-pandemic-later/#:~:text=A%20Decrease%20in%20Sexual%20Harassment%20Claims&text=The%20trend%20changed%20in%202020,the%202018%20and%202019%20numbers..
Eugenios, Jillian. "How 1970s Christian crusader Anita Bryant helped spawn Florida’s LGBT Culture War." NBC News. April 13, 2022. https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/1970s-christian-crusader-anita-bryant-helped-spawn-floridas-lgbtq-cult-rcna24215.
Grigg, Ramons. "Marabel Morgan and Why the Feminist Movement Had to Get Moving." Indelible Ink. March 6, 2019. https://medium.com/indelible-ink/marabel-morgan-and-why-the-feminist-movement-had-to-get-moving-6577731b44e7.
Hogue, Ilyse. "How Phyllis Schlafly Found the Right Balance of Racism and Misogyny and Charted the Future of the Radical Right." The Forge. July 24, 2020. https://forgeorganizing.org/article/how-phyllis-schlafly-found-right-balance-racism-and-misogyny-and-charted-future-radical-0.
History.com Editors. “Women’s March.” HISTORY. January 19, 2021. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/womens-march.
INCITE! “About.” INCITE! N.D. https://incite-national.org/history/.
Jabbra, Nancy W. “Women, Words and War: Explaining 9/11 and Justifying U.S. Military Action in Afghanistan and Iraq.” Journal of International Women's Studies, (2006) 8(1), 236-255. https://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol8/iss1/18.
Katersky, Aaron. “Judge sets 2024 date for Trump's criminal trial in Stormy Daniels case: The former president's criminal trial will begin on March 25, 2024.” ABC News. May 23, 2023. https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-sets-2024-date-trumps-criminal-trial-stormy/story?id=99546544.
Khardori, Ankush. “A Stunning Result in Trump’s Sexual Assault Trial: A new first — and a new low — for the former president.” Politico. May 9, 2023. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/05/09/verdict-trump-sexual-assault-trial-00096039.
Lacdan, Joe. "First enlisted female to graduate from Ranger School reflects on experience." Army News. August 28, 2019. https://www.army.mil/article/226137/first_enlisted_female_to_graduate_from_ranger_school_reflects_on_experience.
Lafferty, Megan et al. “Women of the Gulf War: Understanding Their Military and Health Experiences Over 30 Years.” Military Medicine. 2022. USAC 283. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usac283.
Levenstein, Lisa. They Didn't See Us Coming: The Hidden History of Feminism in the Nineties. New York, NY, Basic Books, 2020.
Marcotte, Amanda. "Nancy Reagan’s anti-feminism might be her most lasting legacy." Salon. March 7, 2016. https://www.salon.com/2016/03/07/nancy_reagans_anti_feminism_might_be_her_most_lasting_legacy/.
Mayer, Jane. Dark Money, The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right. New York: Anchor Books, 2017.
Michals, Debra. "Shirley Chisholm." National Women's History Museum. 2015. www.womenshistory.org/education-resources/biographies/shirley-chisholm.
Morgan, Marabel. "The Total Woman." University of Oregon. https://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~eherman/teaching/texts/Morgan%20Total%20Woman.pdf.
Murphy, Christine. “Honoring Four Women at Ground Zero.” 9/11 Memorial & Museum. N.D. https://www.911memorial.org/connect/blog/honoring-four-women-ground-zero.
National Archives. “Melania Trump.” Trump White House. N.D. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/people/melania-trump/.
Neuman, Scott. "First Female Soldiers Graduate from Army Ranger School." NPR. August 21, 2015. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/08/21/433482186/first-female-soldiers-graduate-from-army-ranger-school.
Oginitz, Eileen. "Evangelicals Seek Political Clout." Chicago Tribune. January 3, 1980. http://www.wiu.edu/cas/history/wihr/pdfs/Banwart-MoralMajorityVol5.pdf.
Pauley, Jane. “Heroes of Flight 93.” NBC News. July 29, 2002. https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna3080117.
Pachucki, Jenny. “Remembering 9/11 Hero Flight Attendant Betty Ong.” 9/11 Memorial & Museum. N.D. https://www.911memorial.org/connect/blog/remembering-911-hero-flight-attendant-betty-ong.
Petrusich, Amanda. “Why the Chicks Dropped Their “Dixie.” The New Yorker Magazine. July 13, 2020. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/07/20/why-the-chicks-dropped-their-dixie.
PEW Research Center. “An Examination of the 2016 Electorate Based on Validated Voters.” PEW Research Center. August 9, 2018. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/08/09/an-examination-of-the-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/.
Rutgers. "History of Woman Governors." Center for American Women and Politic, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University. 2023. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/facts/levels-office/statewide-elective-executive/history-women-governors.
Rice, Condoleeza. “Frontline Interview.” PBS. Campaign Against Terror. July 12, 2002. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/campaign/interviews/rice.html.
"#Metoo." Move Me: A guide to social movements and social media. https://moveme.berkeley.edu/project/metoo/#ftnt1.
Sainato, Michael. "A Lost history: the US women who fought for better working conditions." The Guardian. January 21, 2021. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jan/31/9to5-pbs-documentary-women-working-conditions.
Schlafly, Phylis. "What’s Wrong With ‘Equal Rights’ For Women?" The Phyllis Schlafly Report. Vol. 5 No. 7. February 1972. https://eagleforum.org/publications/psr/feb1972.html.
Sister Song. “About Us.” Sister Song. N.D. https://www.sistersong.net/about-x2.
SONG. “Vision, Mission, and History.” SONG. N.D. https://southernersonnewground.org/who-we-are/vision-mission-history/.
"Women Appointed to Presidential Cabinets." Center for American Women and Politic, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University. February 28, 2023. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/resources/womenapptdtoprescabinets.pdf.
Yang, Maya. “How women played crucial roles in Iraq – and changed US military forever.” The Guardian. March 21, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/21/iraq-war-us-military-women.
Bard, Christine. "Antifeminism." Digital Encyclopedia of European History. https://ehne.fr/en/encyclopedia/authors/christine-bard.
Bauer-Wolf, Jeremy. “Mattress Protest and Its Aftermath.” Inside Higher Ed. July 23, 2017. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/07/24/media-circus-surrounding-mattress-girl-case-changed-conversation-sexual-assault.
Bergeron, Ryan. "The Seventies: Women Make Waves." CNN. August 17, 2015. https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/22/living/the-seventies-feminism-womens-lib/index.html.
Black Lives Matter. “About.” Black Lives Matter. https://blacklivesmatter.com/herstory/.
Cardin, Kelly M. and Evan B. Citron. “#MeToo and the Workplace: Five Years and a Pandemic Later.” OGLETREE. May 24, 2022. https://ogletree.com/insights/metoo-and-the-workplace-five-years-and-a-pandemic-later/#:~:text=A%20Decrease%20in%20Sexual%20Harassment%20Claims&text=The%20trend%20changed%20in%202020,the%202018%20and%202019%20numbers..
Eugenios, Jillian. "How 1970s Christian crusader Anita Bryant helped spawn Florida’s LGBT Culture War." NBC News. April 13, 2022. https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/1970s-christian-crusader-anita-bryant-helped-spawn-floridas-lgbtq-cult-rcna24215.
Grigg, Ramons. "Marabel Morgan and Why the Feminist Movement Had to Get Moving." Indelible Ink. March 6, 2019. https://medium.com/indelible-ink/marabel-morgan-and-why-the-feminist-movement-had-to-get-moving-6577731b44e7.
Hogue, Ilyse. "How Phyllis Schlafly Found the Right Balance of Racism and Misogyny and Charted the Future of the Radical Right." The Forge. July 24, 2020. https://forgeorganizing.org/article/how-phyllis-schlafly-found-right-balance-racism-and-misogyny-and-charted-future-radical-0.
History.com Editors. “Women’s March.” HISTORY. January 19, 2021. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/womens-march.
INCITE! “About.” INCITE! N.D. https://incite-national.org/history/.
Jabbra, Nancy W. “Women, Words and War: Explaining 9/11 and Justifying U.S. Military Action in Afghanistan and Iraq.” Journal of International Women's Studies, (2006) 8(1), 236-255. https://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol8/iss1/18.
Katersky, Aaron. “Judge sets 2024 date for Trump's criminal trial in Stormy Daniels case: The former president's criminal trial will begin on March 25, 2024.” ABC News. May 23, 2023. https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-sets-2024-date-trumps-criminal-trial-stormy/story?id=99546544.
Khardori, Ankush. “A Stunning Result in Trump’s Sexual Assault Trial: A new first — and a new low — for the former president.” Politico. May 9, 2023. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/05/09/verdict-trump-sexual-assault-trial-00096039.
Lacdan, Joe. "First enlisted female to graduate from Ranger School reflects on experience." Army News. August 28, 2019. https://www.army.mil/article/226137/first_enlisted_female_to_graduate_from_ranger_school_reflects_on_experience.
Lafferty, Megan et al. “Women of the Gulf War: Understanding Their Military and Health Experiences Over 30 Years.” Military Medicine. 2022. USAC 283. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usac283.
Levenstein, Lisa. They Didn't See Us Coming: The Hidden History of Feminism in the Nineties. New York, NY, Basic Books, 2020.
Marcotte, Amanda. "Nancy Reagan’s anti-feminism might be her most lasting legacy." Salon. March 7, 2016. https://www.salon.com/2016/03/07/nancy_reagans_anti_feminism_might_be_her_most_lasting_legacy/.
Mayer, Jane. Dark Money, The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right. New York: Anchor Books, 2017.
Michals, Debra. "Shirley Chisholm." National Women's History Museum. 2015. www.womenshistory.org/education-resources/biographies/shirley-chisholm.
Morgan, Marabel. "The Total Woman." University of Oregon. https://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~eherman/teaching/texts/Morgan%20Total%20Woman.pdf.
Murphy, Christine. “Honoring Four Women at Ground Zero.” 9/11 Memorial & Museum. N.D. https://www.911memorial.org/connect/blog/honoring-four-women-ground-zero.
National Archives. “Melania Trump.” Trump White House. N.D. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/people/melania-trump/.
Neuman, Scott. "First Female Soldiers Graduate from Army Ranger School." NPR. August 21, 2015. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/08/21/433482186/first-female-soldiers-graduate-from-army-ranger-school.
Oginitz, Eileen. "Evangelicals Seek Political Clout." Chicago Tribune. January 3, 1980. http://www.wiu.edu/cas/history/wihr/pdfs/Banwart-MoralMajorityVol5.pdf.
Pauley, Jane. “Heroes of Flight 93.” NBC News. July 29, 2002. https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna3080117.
Pachucki, Jenny. “Remembering 9/11 Hero Flight Attendant Betty Ong.” 9/11 Memorial & Museum. N.D. https://www.911memorial.org/connect/blog/remembering-911-hero-flight-attendant-betty-ong.
Petrusich, Amanda. “Why the Chicks Dropped Their “Dixie.” The New Yorker Magazine. July 13, 2020. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/07/20/why-the-chicks-dropped-their-dixie.
PEW Research Center. “An Examination of the 2016 Electorate Based on Validated Voters.” PEW Research Center. August 9, 2018. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/08/09/an-examination-of-the-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/.
Rutgers. "History of Woman Governors." Center for American Women and Politic, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University. 2023. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/facts/levels-office/statewide-elective-executive/history-women-governors.
Rice, Condoleeza. “Frontline Interview.” PBS. Campaign Against Terror. July 12, 2002. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/campaign/interviews/rice.html.
"#Metoo." Move Me: A guide to social movements and social media. https://moveme.berkeley.edu/project/metoo/#ftnt1.
Sainato, Michael. "A Lost history: the US women who fought for better working conditions." The Guardian. January 21, 2021. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jan/31/9to5-pbs-documentary-women-working-conditions.
Schlafly, Phylis. "What’s Wrong With ‘Equal Rights’ For Women?" The Phyllis Schlafly Report. Vol. 5 No. 7. February 1972. https://eagleforum.org/publications/psr/feb1972.html.
Sister Song. “About Us.” Sister Song. N.D. https://www.sistersong.net/about-x2.
SONG. “Vision, Mission, and History.” SONG. N.D. https://southernersonnewground.org/who-we-are/vision-mission-history/.
"Women Appointed to Presidential Cabinets." Center for American Women and Politic, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University. February 28, 2023. https://cawp.rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/resources/womenapptdtoprescabinets.pdf.
Yang, Maya. “How women played crucial roles in Iraq – and changed US military forever.” The Guardian. March 21, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/21/iraq-war-us-military-women.