Network of enlightened Women
blog.enlightenedwomen.org
Syndicate
Join Our Facebook Group
Share This
Network of enlightened Women
The War Against Boys: Chapter 2, Part II (page 59-72)
"The girl-crisis advocates have succeeded in projecting an image of males as predators and females as hapless victims. They have convinced school administrators, leaders of teachers' unions, and officials in the U.S. Department of Education to support them and fund them."
The facts show that males tend to be more aggressive than females, nevertheless, that doesn't give girl-crisis advocates the liberty to brand every male a potential menace to society. Healthy men, men who use their desire to compete, achieve and win for positive and productive purposes are a blessing to our society. We owe our American Independence and safety to these very young men, men who throughout history have sacrificed their lives to guard and protect us:
"Healthy young men express their manhood in competitive endeavors that are often physical. As they mature, they take on responsibilities, strive for excellence, achieve and 'win.' They assert their masculinity in ways that require physical and intellectual skills and self-discipline. In American society, healthy, normal young men (which is to say, the overwhelming majority) don't batter, rape, or terrorize women; they respect them and treat them as friends."
Sommers goes on to quote feminist writer Camille Paglia, an author who expresses a positive and praiseworthy view of the male sex:
"For Paglia, male aggressiveness and competitiveness are animating principles of creativity: 'Masculinity is aggressive, unstable combustible. It is also the most creative cultural force in history.' Speaking of the 'fashionable disdain for 'patriarchal society' to which nothing good is ever attributed,' she writes, 'But it is patriarchal society that has freed me as a woman. It is capitalism that has given me the leisure to sit at this desk writing this book. Let us stop being small-minded about men and freely acknowledge what treasures their obsessiveness has poured into culture.' Men, writes Paglia, 'created the world we live in and the luxuries we enjoy' : 'When I cross the George Washington Bridge or any of America's great bridges, I think—men have done this. Construction is a sublime male poetry.'"
It is refreshing to find a feminist who isn't battering the male sex, a woman who can appreciate and complement the many great and wonderful achievements of men in our society. Now that we have looked at the positive we most also draw our attention to the negative:
"All the same, Paglia's praise of males may sound irrelevant to administrators who have hard-core disciplinary problems in their schools. Much antisocial behavior is sexual. Much of it perpetrated by males. The equity specialists may be routinely guilty of misrepresenting the facts and unfairly putting men and boys in bad light; but they are not wrong when they point out that our schools are plagued with sexually crude, disrespectful, and untoward behavior."
Sommers proposes a solution to the problem of immorality and incivility in today's youth:
"The answer is that boys do, indeed, need to be educated and civilized. They need to be turned into respectful human beings. one must show them, in ways that leave them in no doubt, that they cannot get away with bullying or harassing other students. Boys need strong moral guidance. Our schools should implement firm codes of discipline and clear and unequivocal rules against profanity, incivility and hurtful behavior. Teachers and administrators have to establish a school environment that does not tolerate any variety of egregious meanness and incivility—sexual or nonsexual. Boys badly need moral education and discipline. So do girls."
Moral training, Sommers believes is the key to establishing genuine fairness and equity in our schools. Once we establish a firm understanding of ethics within our young people, we will have a brighter future for all our young people, boys and girls alike.
The War Against Boys: Chapter 2, Part I (page 45-58)
In Chapter 2, Reeducating The Nation's Boys, Sommers does a thorough job of proving the point that our society is trying to reinvent boys. There is a wonderful quote at the beginning of the chapter:
"This general evil they maintain: All men are bad and in their badness reign." Shakespeare, Sonnet 121
Shakespeare's insightful observation still rings true today. Our society views men as a troubled sex, prone to violence:
"As they see it, violence is 'gendered' and its gender is male. They regard male aggression as the root of most social evils. Many activists in the Ms. Foundation, the AAUW, the National Education Association, and the U.S. Department of Education are persuaded that boys, as unwitting carriers of a pernicious sexism, need special remedial attention."
Katherine Hanson, director of the Women's Educational Equity Act (WEEA) Publishing Center is one of the leaders in the gender-fairness debate. Hanson believes men learn violence from boyhood—Little League is partially to blame:
"This 'culture of violence,' says Hanson, 'stem[s] from cultural norms that socialize males to be aggressive, powerful, unemotional, and controlling.' She urges us to 'honestly and lovingly' reexamine what it means to be a male or female in our society. 'And just as honestly and lovingly, we must help our young people develop new and more healthful models.' One old and unhealthful model of maleness that needs to be 'reexamined' is found in Little League baseball. Writes Hanson, 'One of the most overlooked arenas of violence training within schools may be the environment that surrounds athletics and sports. Beginning with little league games where parents and friends sit on the sidelines and encourage aggressive, violent behavior. . . .'"
Katherine Hanson asserts that in America, nearly four million women are beaten to death every year. She says that violence is the leading cause of death among women. Men beating women at home is the leading cause of injury among women and there was a 59% increase in rape from 1990 to 1991. Sommers discusses Hanson's erroneous claims:
"For the record, the leading cause of death among women is heart disease (c. 370,000 deaths per year), followed by cancer (c. 250,000)."
"Male violence is also far down the list of causes of injury to women. Two studies show of emergency room admissions, one by the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics and one by the Canters for Disease Control and Prevention, suggest that approximately 1 percent of women's injuries are caused by male partners. Hanson's other factoids are no more reliable: between 1990 and 1991 rapes increased by 4 percent, not 59 percent, and the number has gone down steadily since."
This continual battering of the male gender does have a significant affect on boys. A high school teacher in London, Martin Spafford relates his observation:
"Boys are feeling continually attacked for who they are. We have created a sense in school that masculinity is something bad. Boys feel blamed for history, and a school culture has grown up which is suspicious and frightened of boys."
Sommers concluding thoughts:
"All around them, boys find their sex regularly condemned, while girls receive official sympathy as a 'historically under-served population.' At the same time, many boys are unhappily aware that girls are outpacing them. Boys believe that teachers prefer girls, are more interested in girls, and think they are smarter. yet boys are told that live in a patriarchy in which men are unfairly 'in control of our country, our businesses, our schools and . . . the family.'"
The War Against Boys: Chapter 1, Part II (Pg. 33-44)
In the second-half of chapter 1, Sommers repeatedly proves her point that in fact boys are at-risk not girls. Sommers brings study after study to her readers attention, each one documenting the advance of girls and the decline of boys:
"It is very hard to look at the school data on adolescents or the most recent data on college students without coming to the conclusion that girls and young women are thriving, while boys and young men are languishing."
The American Association of University Women (AAUW) commissioned another study, this time focusing seriously on gender and academic achievement:
"In 1995, perhaps in reaction to criticism—from an increasing number of unpersuaded scholars—the AAUW commissioned a more serious scientific study of gender and academic achievement. That study, The Influence of School Climate on Gender Differences in the Achievement and Engagement of Young Adolescents, by University of Michigan professor Valerie E. Lee and her associates, was released without the fanfare the AAUW usually lavishes on such publications. This is not surprising. Lee's study strongly suggests that earlier reports of a tragic demoralization and shortchanging of America's schoolgirls have been greatly exaggerated."
Lee's study found that girls were not failing, they were in-fact more engaged than their male counterparts, they were more prepared for school, had better school attendance records and showed positive academic behavior:
"Lee's temperate conclusions, in research sponsored by the AAUW, were based on U.S. Department of Education data and were fully consistent with the findings of Hedges and Nowell. But they are at odds with the disturbing picture that the AAUW earlier so successfully sold to the American public and Congress. Lee concluded, 'The public discourse around issues of gender in school needs some change . . . Inequity can (and does) work in both directions.' As far as I have been able to ascertain, Valerie Lee's responsible and objective study was not mentioned in a single newspaper."
Two years later a study was funded by Metropolitan Life Insurance Comany entitled, The American Teacher 1997: Examining Gender Issues in Public Schools. MetLife supported this study as a part of its American Teacher series. Their findings amazingly contradicted the girls at-risk theory. The researchers found:
"'Contrary to the commonly held view that boys are at an advantage over girls in school, girls appear to have an advantage over boys in terms of their future plans, teachers' expectations, everyday experiences at school and interactions in the classroom.'"
Even though the American public has been shown over and over again that boys are the ones at-risk, we seemingly ignore the evidence. Britain, on the other hand, has an engaged interest in the decline of their young men:
"Britain has no Carol Gilligan, no Mary Pipher, no AAUW. It is therefore unsurprising that in Britain the plain truth about male underperformance has been reaching an informed and concerned public. For almost a decade, British newspapers and journals have been reporting on the distressing scholastic deficits of British schoolboys. The Times of London warned the prospect of 'an underclass of permanently unemployed, unskilled men.' 'What's Wrong with Boys?' asked the Glasgow Herald. The Economist referred to boys as 'tomorrow's second sex.'"
Sommers continues her admonishment of the American public for ignoring the problem:
"It is time the American public learned about the findings that supersede and contradict the accepted view that girls are academically weaker than boys. Because the British public is well informed about its boys, British schools have a significant head start in programs designed to lift boys out of the 'disillusioned' category and to deal with their chronic underachievement. We have much to learn from their initiatives and even more from their healthy, commonsense approach to what they rightly see as a serious national emergency. For the time being, however, the academic problems of American boys are invisible."
In closing, Sommers points out that some are taking notice of the boys' decline, however, they are not trying to simply build and support our young men, instead they are trying to re-invent them:
"The belief that boys are being wrongly 'masculinized' is inspiring a movement to 'construct boyhood' in ways that will render boys less competitive, more emotionally expressive, more nurturing—more, in short, like girls. Gloria Steinem summarizes the view of many in the boys-should-be-changed camp when she says, 'We badly need to raise boys more like girls.'"
Discussion Questions: What should the American public do to stop the decline of young men? Should we follow in Britain's shoes? What do you think of Gloria Steinem's viewpoint?
The War Against Boys, Chapter 1: Where The Boys Are, Part 1 (pg. 17-33)
Chapter 1 is a study on the history of gender equality in the United States. Sommers does an excellent job of explaining how the gender gap was realized and who brought it to our attention:
"In 1990, Carol Gilligan announced to the world that America's adolescent girls were in crisis. In her words, 'As the river of a girl's life flows into the sea of Western culture, she is in danger of drowning or disappearing.' Gilligan offered little in the way of conventional evidence to support this alarming finding. Indeed, it is hard to imagine what sort of empirical research could establish so large a claim. But Gilligan quickly attracted powerful allies. Within a very short time the allegedly fragile and demoralized state of American adolescent girls achieved the status of a national emergency."
Sommers goes on to explain that Gilligan is the scientific and academic authority on the girls crisis movement:
"She is the matron saint of the girl crisis movement. Gilligan, more than anyone else, is cited as the academic and scientific authority conferring respectability on the claims that American girls are being psychologically depleted, socially 'silenced,' and academically 'shortchanged.'"
Women's special interest groups were interested in Gilligan's claims, the American Association of University Women (AAUW) expressed specific concern. The AAUW went on to commission more studies on girls and their supposed depleted self-confidence:
"The AAUW quickly commissioned a second study, How Schools Shortchange Girls. This new study, carried out by the Wellesley College Center for Research on Women and released in 1992, asserted a direct casual relationship between girls' (alleged) second-class status in the nations' schools and deficiencies in their level of self-esteem. Carol Gilligan's psychological girl crisis was thus transformed into a pressing civil rights issue: girls were victims of widespread sexist discrimination in our nation's schools. 'The implications are clear,' said the AAUW; 'the system must change.'"
Gilligan's belief in a girl crisis was was so influential that in 1994 the U.S. Congress passed the Gender Equity in Education Act:
"in 1994, the allegedly low state of America's girls moved the U.S. Congress to pass the Gender Equity in Education Act, which categorized girls as an 'under-served population' on par with other discriminated-against minorities. Millions of dollars in grants were awarded to study the plight of girls and learn how to cope with the insidious bias against them. At the UN Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995, members of the American delegation presented the educational and psychological deficits of American girls as a pressing human rights issue."
Although Gilligan's girl crisis tugs at America's heartstrings, the facts prove the opposite is true—boys are the ones in crisis:
"Data from the U.S. Department of Education and from several recent university studies show that far from being shy and demoralized, today's girls outshine boys. girls get better grades. They have higher educational aspirations. They follow a more rigorous academic program and participated more in the prestigious Advanced Placement (AP) program."
Sommers goes on to explain how truly disturbing the male crisis is:
"Girls read more books. They outperform males on tests of artistic and musical ability. More girls than boys study abroad. More join the Peace Corps. Conversely, more boys than girls are suspended from school. More are held back and more drop out. Boys are three times as likely as girls to be enrolled in special education programs and four times as likely as girls to be diagnosed with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)."
It is saddening to see how neglected the male population has become; we must change something before it's too late. Sommers closes this portion of the chapter with this sobering thought:
"Here we have a genuinely worrisome gender gap, with boys well behind girls. It is this gap that should concern educators, parents, school boards, and legislators. Engagement with school is perhaps the single most important predictor of academic success. But boys' weaker commitment is not addressed at the equity seminars and workshops around the country. Instead, the fashionable but spurious self-esteem gap continues to be the prevailing concern—the gap that the AAUW, in its zeal to 'know more' about Carol Gilligan's findings, claims to have exposed."
Discussion Thoughts: Were you aware that boys are falling behind academically? If so, what can we do to help?
The War Against Boys: Preface
The War Against Boys is the story of our cultural attack on the modern male. Twenty-first century men are looked down-upon, laughed at, and many times emasculated in our day-to-day lives. In her book, Christina Hoff Sommers does an excellent job reminding us that men are responsible for a lot of good in the world:
"This book tells the story of how it has become fashionable to attribute pathology to millions of healthy male children. It is a story of how we are turning against boys and forgetting a simple truth: that the energy, competitiveness, and corporal daring of normal, decent males is responsible for much of what is right in the word."
Sommers' goal is to "set the record straight:" to discredit misinformation, show the facts and declare the truth about men in our culture:
"In this book I try to correct the misinformation and give an accurate picture of "where the boys are." A review of the facts shows boys, not girls, on the weak side of an educational gender gap. Boys, on average, are a year and a half behind girls in reading and writing; they are less committed to school and less likely to go to college. In 1997, college full-time enrollments were 45 percent male and 55 percent female. The U.S. Department of Education predicts that the ratio of boys' entry into college will continue to worsen."
Our culture has promoted a skewed view; most people believe that women are treated unfairly, that men need to be changed and "recreated," to connect with their feminine side:
"American boys face genuine problems that cannot be addressed by constructing new versions of manhood. They do not need to be "rescued" from their masculinity. On the other hand, too many of our sons are languishing academically and socially. The widening education gap threatens the future of millions of American boys."
According to Sommers, other countries are significantly ahead of the United States in solving the languishing academic and social struggles of boys:
"Like American boys, boys in Great Britain and Australia are markedly behind girls academically, notably in reading and writing. . . The big difference is that British educators and politicians are ten years ahead of Americans in confronting and specifically addressing the problem of male underachievement. The British government has introduced a highly successful back-to-basics program into primary schools called the Literacy Hour. Its explicit purpose is to help boys catch up with the girls. The British are also experimenting with all-male classes in coed public schools. They are again allowing "gender stereotypes" in their educational materials. They have found that boys enjoy and will read adventure stories with male heroes. War poetry is back. So is classroom competition."
In closing, Sommers gives her reader a wonderful overview of the book, and a heartfelt plea for change before it's too late:
"In the war against boys, as in all wars, the first casualty is truth. In the United States, the truth about boys has been distorted and buried. I begin by showing how the plight of boys came to be buried and by whom. I then report on actual condition of boys, giving readers documented accounts of how boys are faring and suggestion what we can do to brighten their prospects. boys badly need our attention. It is late, but not too late."
Discussion Questions: Do you believe there is a war against boys? In your personal experience, have you noticed our culture devaluing, belittling or ignoring men and the problems they face?
Modern Plagiarism: Cheating or Just Misunderstanding?
Before the Internet age travelers had no choice but to use foldable maps for directions, businesses were forced to keep records by hand, and it was required that students frequent the library for information.
These days are long gone.
Maps are accessible in seconds on smart phones, businesses can maintain records with the click of a button, and college students download work created specifically for assignments delegated to them by professors. The information age ushered in an era of easy, instant, and infinite possibilities to students navigating their way through college. Concurrently, the information age also ushered in an era of plagiarism. According to the New York Times, today’s plagiarism differs significantly from past plagiarism… because today’s students don’t even know they’re doing it.
The lines between plagiarism and proper citation are easier to blur then they used to be. Rather then being forced to type out passages from books or paper reports, students can merely access Wikipedia, news articles, or blogs relevant to assignments. Quickly copying and pasting information into word documents, the origin of material is quickly forgotten. Students brush off such acts, and may cite information as “common knowledge.” This is especially true when it comes to work that lists no author, or to work created by many individuals like Wikipedia.
According to Donald L. McCabe, a co-founder of the Center for Academic Integrity and business professor at Rutgers University,
“about 40 percent of 14,000 undergraduates admitted to copying a few sentences in written assignments.”
While plagiarizing is a serious offense, the lack of knowledge of such an act is even more disturbing. How might an individual or institution prevent students from cheating if s/he believes no wrongdoing has occurred? After all, our generation (generation Y) is one of music and movie downloading, blogging, emailing, facebooking and accessing information that is for the most part all free. Using someone else’s words to supplement a homework assignment appears to be no different.
It is clear through recent studies universities may have a burgeoning issue to face. How may students learn the distinction between acceptable citation and plagiarism? It seems that professors may have another topic to discuss with students on the first day of class (well – at least a more detailed discussion). As circumstances and technology continue to evolve, so will incoming freshman’s perceptions of morality. It is important to remember that it is impossible for anyone to solve a problem if it is not yet recognized as a problem. Recognition must be the first step in curtailing this epidemic.
A product of constantly evolving technology, ethics and norms must constantly be revisited. What was once clear from listening to years of elementary, middle, and high school lectures on the consequences of “copying from your neighbors work,” no longer rings true in an age that consists of cell phones, computers, and ipads.
Great Opportunity: NeW Fall Internships
Are you looking for an opportunity to build your knowledge of conservative principles, enhance your activism skills, and strengthen your resume? If so, consider applying for a NeW Semester internship!
If you are already involved in your NeW chapter, this is a great way to build your involvement and grow as a leader. Likewise, if you are new to NeW, this is a great way to get involved. Internships range from public relations, new media, development, or operational. Interns can receive college credit if your university accepts non-profit internships.
If you are interested, please email NeW President Karin Agness at karin.agness@enlightenedwomen.org for more information.
Fewer Women Have Children Today
Sabrina Schaeffer, a visiting fellow at Independent Women's Forum, reported yesterday that more and more women remain childless, according to the Pew Research Center.
The numbers actually reveal some interesting truths. I assumed the main explanation was career achievement and higher education. That is true to some extent, but it does not reflect the entire story. According to the report,
"Nearly one-in-five American women ends her childbearing years without having borne a child, compared with one-in-ten in the 1970s. While childlessness has risen for all racial and ethnic groups, and most education levels, it has fallen over the past decade for women with advanced degrees."
The study explores further why the childless rate has increased. Many of the reasons are obvious: birth control, more career options, and differing attitudes about women's independence. The study also finds that being childless is much more socially acceptable than it once was. Women are also having children later in life than ever before.
Is this new report a good sign for women? We now have the opportunity to pursue so many career options, and we have more independence than ever before. However, do you think the changing social norms are positive or negative for women? In the positive sense, women do not have to conform to one type of woman; we have more choices about if, when, and how we want to start families. Alternatively, though, has there been a reversal of pressure not to have children young, or even at all, in order to make full strides in your career?
Washington D.C. Women Get Needed Ego Boost
As if America didn’t already have enough reality shows, we get to add one more to the list: The Real Housewives of D.C.
Being a D.C. area native I’ll be the first to admit I will watch the show out of pure curiosity. Even though the show has yet to air, it has already generated considerable controversy. Who could forget when Michaele Salahi and her husband crashed a White House dinner party? The story made national headlines before the show was even discussed in press.
The country has already watched “Housewife” shows based in Atlanta, Orange County, CA, New York, and New Jersey. What has prompted this surge in “Housewife” programming? Interestingly enough, most of the women involved in these shows aren’t even housewives. In most cases one or two women may barely classify as housewives, and the rest with careers just get lumped in with them by association.
The bottom line is: we want to know what women with money, power, and free time do with their lives. For some women being a housewife still has nostalgia associated with it; filled with dinner parties, shopping, and constant interior decorating. Unfortunately, for most stay at home wives and moms this is not what everyday life normally consists of. Replace dinner parties with macaroni and cheese, shopping for grocery shopping, and interior decorating with household chores and you may have a more accurate picture.
Regardless of how ridiculous and unrealistic these shows are, ratings go up and we continue to see housewife show spawn.
The Real Housewives of D.C. will face challenges that other cities could largely avoid. Many important D.C. persons, in this case women, cannot even indulge themselves with the thought of a reality show because of their sensitive jobs. Let’s be honest – D.C. is a far cry from Orange County, CA or New York City. Generally speaking it’s not a good idea to punk the federal government (although Salahi obviously didn’t get that memo). Most of our revenue does not come from the entertainment business. D.C. residents are more likely to be concerned with policy then plastic surgery.
We will have to wait until August 5 (9/8c if you must know) to find out what Bravo thinks D.C. women are like. I imagine they won’t even come close to portraying the lives of D.C.’s real female political insiders. This is ever more apparent while reading the cast’s bios. In Catherine Ommanney’s Bravo bio it states that Ommanney “quickly began socializing with Washington’s elite crowd, and counts many high-profile political figures among her friends.” Let’s be frank – if you need to tell people you hang out with an “elite crowd,” you probably don’t.
D.C. Housewives will be just like its predecessors, unrealistic, vapid, and ignorant to the difficulties faced by working and nonworking women in the city. Nice try Bravo, nice try.
Mrs. President Someday Soon
To date, no American woman has ever been elected to the office of U.S. President; however, times are changing, according to a recent Rasmussen poll. 87% of American voters believe it is somewhat likely that a woman will be elected President in the next 25 years. That number has increased eight points in four years. 58% of Americans believe a female U.S. President in the next 25 years is very likely.
In a few other questions, however, the poll found that men would be more likely to support a male candidate and a woman would be more likely to support a female candidate in an election.
There were some other interesting findings in this poll, particularly on the label of "feminist." The report explains,
"Just 14% consider describing a woman candidate as a feminist to be a positive. Thirty-five percent (35%) view it as a negative description, while 46% rate it somewhere in between a positive and a negative."
And what about the women's voice, a position traditionally held by the National Organization for Women? Rasmussen reports,
"Among women voters, 51% view NOW favorably, while 32% have an unfavorable opinion."
In a final poll of interest, Rasmussen describes,
"Most adults believe women in America are better off today than they were 25 years ago, but they still don’t think women receive equal pay for equal work."
What do you think? Are American women ready for the job, and are Americans ready for a female President? The last election seems to indicate that Americans are ready for women to be in this office and this poll further confirms it. However, the poll also confirms that Democrats will vote for Democrats will vote for Democrats despite their gender and that Republicans will vote for Republicans despite their gender. As well, women are more likely to vote for women when candidates are "equal" on all other issues, and men are more likely to vote for men in this same scenario. In many ways, this poll indicates that women are advancing in the political sphere, increasing the likelihood of a female President.
Check out the full report to see how American women are voting and how Americans feel about women in office. It's certainly some interesting food for thought!
The Online Book Club Announces Newest Book: The War Against Boys by Christina Hoff Sommers
Dear Online Book Club Members and Blog Readers,
During first week in August, we will begin our new book for the Online Book Club, The War Against Boys, by Christina Hoff Sommers, who also was the keynote speaker at NeW's National Conference in June. This is a fantastic book; Sommers does a masterful job proving to her readers that "misguided feminism is harming our young men."
Here is a link to Amazon.com where you can purchase the book to join us in our discussion: The War Against Boys. I look forward to our discussion!
Sincerely,
Annemarie
A NeW Kind of History Lesson: Women and Bicycles
Bicycles were first introduced in America in 1878. This new way of transportation intrigued women but there was one small complication-what to wear?!? Or more seriously, could women ride bicycles?
Quickly, doctors came up with theories that riding bicycles was an unhealthy practice for fragile women. Their current way of dressing could easily get caught up in the mechanics of the bike and create potential injury.
In an article from the Ladies' Standard Magazine, April 1894 , women were encouraged not to eat too much before riding, that a full wool outfit should be worn to prevent a cold during any season (yes, including summer), and was compared to both operating a sewing machine and walking.
"Cycling calls for activity, alertness, accuracy, and grace in the upper portions of the body, but in no place is there an undue strain."
In addition to heath concerns, many men also feared the independence that bicycles would bring women. So, what was the solution? By 1894, the adaptable dress was created so women could go from proper lady appropriate to bicycle riding appropriate. You can look at the picture above to see how ankle belts were added to the skirt in order to create 'bloomers' when riding the bicycle.
Men eventually gave in and didn't make the issue of women bicycling as big of a deal as it initially was. Women were gaining independence in many different areas at this time, building steam to eventually band together for the Women's Suffrage movement.
Who knew bicycles played such a role in Women's History?
Gossip
Few things in this world are universal. Gossip may well be one of them. Our society is obsessed with it. We have tabloids, magazines, television shows, and news prints dedicated to nothing but gossip. We can all think of times when we have heard or participated in gossip. I would venture to say that there is not one of us that has not at some time or the other gossiped. While everyone gossips, I think women are best known for it.
Why do we gossip? Some people gossip to fill an emotional need. They feel jealous, envious, inferior, or like they don’t belong. Talking about others can temporarily ease these feelings. Jealous? Envious? Mask it by talking about that person’s clothes, friends, or lifestyle. Feel as if you don’t belong to a group? Talk about someone outside that group with the group in order to ‘win’ a place in it. Gossip is often used a social manipulation tool. Additionally, it is often used to express strong feelings. We gossip about others to exercise anger, to rail against perceived injustice, or to express heartache that person has caused us.
Some would argue that women are biologically predisposed to gossip. I see this as nothing more than a way to excuse bad behavior. Each one of us chooses how to behave and what to say. Defaming gossip has harsh and far-reaching consequences. The first is ruined relationships. Defaming gossip can ruin any relationship. One slip of the tongue in a moment of anger and you may see life-long relationships end immediately. Gossip can also ruin a potential relationship. Having a reputation as a gossip monger could make people not even want to meet you. Additionally, such a reputation could translate directly into trust issues. If you will freely speak despairingly of others, how can your friends trust you not to speak that way about them? Take that one step further. How can the person you date or are married to trust you not to publicly defame them in a moment of anger? Gossip has the ability to affect every interpersonal relationship in your life, including work relationships. If you gossip in order to express repressed feelings, take time to think of some other outlets. Find a single confidant, exercise, or pray. Surely there is an alternative that fits your life.
On the other hand, not all gossip is bad. Gossip often is the social glue in our interpersonal relationships. It can be the agent that allows us to discuss and explore relationships, attitudes, and different world views. Derogatory gossip, however, is not the best agent for this. The key to gossip or interpersonal communication is to think before you speak. I recently attended a meeting in which author Jerry Bridges stated that there are three questions you should ask yourself before speaking about someone else.
1. Is it true?
2. Is it kind?
3. Is it necessary?
We can all use these three simple questions to avoid the pitfalls of derogatory gossip. If we all take a moment to think through things before we speak, we can build more relationships, strengthen the relationships we have, build our self-worth without tearing down those around us, and begin to change the view the world holds that women enjoy character-defaming gossip.
Symposium for Students in Virginia
One of the attendees of the NeW Reception in June asked us to pass along information about a symposium she is organizing for students in Virginia. See below:
The Beacon Hill Society presents
“Herein We Stand”
A symposium for high school and college-aged adults
10:00am Friday, July 30th, at the Virginia State Capitol
Come hear Becky Norton Dunlop, VP at the Heritage Foundation, and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli for an exciting day of learning about history. Go to www.thebeaconhillsociety.com to register and for more information. Registration ends July 23, and space is limited. Parents welcome and encouraged to attend!
Another Disingenuous Confirmation
Elena Kagan had the chance to be original. She had the ability to change the "vapid and hollow charade" that is the Supreme Court nomination process, in her own words, as referenced in her 1995 law review article. She was, however, incredibly evasive about the least precarious of questions. For instance, when asked, simply, "What are you passionate about?," she responded with a circuitous ramble ultimately saying, as she did with many other questions, that it would be inappropriate for her to suggest that she was passionate about any one subject. She even seemed unprepared for the most basic question: "Why do you want to be a Supreme Court justice?"
Elena Kagan is no ordinary woman. She was the first female Dean of Harvard Law School and the first female solicitor general of the United States. After law school, she clerked for a Circuit judge and then for Supreme Court justice Thurgood Marshall before going into private practice in Washington, DC. As a law student myself, I can assure every reader that these are among the most coveted positions for any graduate. She served in various other public service roles such as Deputy Assistant to the President (Clinton) for Domestic Policy and Associate Counsel. With such a diverse and learned background, why the less than ordinary answers?
Was she unwilling to confront honestly her own inclinations about the confirmation process at the risk of getting "borked?" I understand her hesitation in being as forthcoming as she proposed in her law review article, as every answer has the potential of ruining her chances of becoming the next Supreme; however, I would have a lot more respect for her had she been the second nominee to help make the process more meaningful.
Pampers are Worth Every Penny...
When it comes to parenting in the 21st century, we have much to be thankful for. The Wall Street Journal's Michelle Gerdes articulates the difficulties associated with being a mother in the era of all things “green.” A current best seller in France entitled “Le Conflit: la femme et la mère” (“Conflict: The Woman and the Mother”) outlines the trends that fostered the green mom movement. The three largest trends discussed in the book are:
- Ecology and a longing to return to “simpler” times
- Behavioral science
- The rise of “essentialist” feminism
The book’s author, Elisabeth Badinter, notes that these trends can create guilt in women who cannot live up to the modern standards of being a mom. Over the last forty years, trends shifted to produce a stereotype of the ideal mom making her children's food from scratch, using disposable diapers, rejecting hormones/ drugs, and essentially reverting back to motherhood as it may have been 100 years ago. Wasn’t there a reason we sought to eliminate the burden of everyday household tasks? Mothers were bound to the home because maintaining a house and raising children literally demanded constant attention. How exactly did this version of parenting start to come back into style?
Ms. Badinter truly hits the nail on the head when it comes to this issue: there is no “right” or “wrong” way to raise a family. Being completely “green,” for lack of a better word, becomes a quality of life (and health) issue for some parents. Dominating paradigms (like those of the essentialist feminism movement) in recent years should not be employed as weapons against mothers who simply cannot comply with the movement’s standards. It is the very luxuries of pre-made baby food and diapers that permit women to return to careers and pursue activities outside the household.
There is nothing wrong with baking cookies from scratch, gardening, and switching from paper towels to dish towels when cleaning up kitchen messes. Thanks to modern baby products however, moms enjoy freedoms that simply did not exist fifty years ago. To me, this sounds much more important then ensuring a child is raised in a completely “natural” environment. Kudos to Ms. Badinter for exploring this important issue and encouraging moms to do what is truly best for them, whatever that may be.
The Twilight Message
As most people are aware, the new movie in the Twilight Saga came out this week. After talking to some friends who are fans of the series and have read the books, I needed a few questions answered. First of all, I found that many people think the series is fantastic simply because they believe it promotes abstinence before marriage. However, I do not think that is the message the series is really sending. I think Twilight is great from a purely entertainment standpoint. As a moral guideline for teenagers, it is sorely lacking.
It is true that in the series, the main characters Bella and Edward do not have sex in the traditional sense until they are married. Indeed, it is mainly the choice of the ‘hero’ Edward. Many plots feature the celibate hero. The hero is celibate for a variety of reasons. He may see it as a distraction from his goal. Others have had bad romantic experiences, feel unworthy, or have secret identities to protect. In this particular case, Edward is afraid of harming Bella. He is not abstaining from sex for any real religious or moral conviction. He is doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. Does that still make it right? Additionally, if you are a teenage girl and your boyfriend is not a vampire, does the Twilight series tell you wait or does it actually encourage you to have sex?
Annalee Newitz brings up an interesting point when she observes that "all these teens ever do is jump into each other's bedrooms and kiss and pant heavily. This is not a movie about avoiding sex: The sex is just taking place offscreen. ”
Additionally, many critics would argue that, thoughit is not sex in the traditional sense, the scene at the end of the movie Twilight is in fact a sex scene. When Edward has to suck venom out of Bella to save her life, we witness a very erotic moment. It consists of a complete loss of control, writhing, moaning, and obvious satisfaction. While it is not sex, it is undoubtedly sexual behavior.The Twilight Saga obviously promotes the idea that sexual behavior in a committed relationship is acceptable regardless of age. Please note that Edward is 109 and Bella is 17. Therefore, relationships with much older men are perfectly acceptable. Sexual behavior in committed relationships is acceptable. Sex is acceptable before marriage if no immediate harm will befall you.
While, I could continue to write about the misnomers that make up the Twilight Saga, I will simply say that no tween, teen, or woman should respect or model these characters’ behavior without serious thought to what they are actually representing.
NewMoon, Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Celibacy
Celebrating the Fourth, Celebrating the Founding
What does the Fourth of July mean to you? It's often a time for families and friends to get together, enjoy a barbeque, watch some fireworks, and treat it as a night just like any other night (except add in massive amounts of delicious food, sparklers, and maybe a boating excursion). Far too often, the Fourth has become a commonplace holiday; we celebrate it as a holiday, but we typically forget the significance of this holiday in our nation and what it means for our freedom. I know I am quick to be consumed by the array of food spread out on the picnic table, the games going on, and the fireworks being displayed.
Certainly, it is a great thing that so many Americans use the Fourth as a time for family and social gatherings; however, I know I am guilty of celebrating without being grateful for our freedom, for the Founders, and for what the Fourth means in our lives. Thanks to InsiderOnline, a site hosted by The Heritage Foundation, we can all gain some inspiration from conservative and libertarian leaders about the Founding and the Founders on the Fourth. Here's what a few of them have to say:
What was the most important idea of the Founders?
Ginni Thomas, President of LibertyCentral.org writes,
"While the Founders understood that men were not angels, they also recognized the inherent danger of powerful, centralized government. The simultaneous recognition of both of these principles is remarkable and formed the philosophical foundation for our system of limited Constitutional government. This foundation provided for the greatest degree of individual liberty within a robust independent civil society that could form, naturally, a just and successful society."
Jamie Radtke, Chairman of the Virginia Tea Party Patriot Federation answers,
"In my opinion, one of their most significant achievements was the idea of a written constitution. Our U.S. Constitution was designed to serve as a limitation on federal powers, which is what makes it unique and powerful."
Do you have a favorite story about the founding?
Erin O'Keefe, Chairman of the Sam Adams Alliance answers,
"The Boston Tea Party happened during a time of very low taxes, and the tea in the harbor had the lowest price of any tea from Britain for years, because the British government sharply lowered the duties on the tea, while retaining a modest tax. The duty and the tax both went to the British government, but the patriots had drawn a line that did not define duties as taxes. So the British imposed that tax not to raise revenue, but to exercise their claimed authority to be able to impose whatever taxes they wanted. The Boston Tea Party was conducted entirely based on a principle; taxes were low, not high. But the patriots viewed their local control of government and taxes as an essential anchor for their liberty, so they rebelled at a violation of a basic principle."
For a complete listing of these leaders' responses, visit InsiderOnline.org. May this series help us all to recognize the great blessing of being an American and to remember the significance of the Founders' sacrifices and ideas in our lives. Happy Fourth of July!
Highlights from the 5th Annual NeW National Conference
NeW's 5th Annual National Conference was a huge success! A special thank you to all of the NeW leaders and NeW supporters who attended. We hope those of you who were at the conference left encouraged and hopeful about the future for young women.
NeW kicked off the conference Thursday night with a special reception welcoming women from across the movement. NeW leaders met and mingled with some of the top female leaders in the movement.
NeW's Founder Karin Agness opened the conference with the history of NeW and how she founded NeW at UVA in 2004. She shared how NeW has grown from one chapter to over 20 in only five years, why NeW is needed, and why there is a growing demand for NeW across the country.
Next, Dr. Christina Hoff Sommers, author of Who Stole Feminism? and scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, discussed the growing problems with radical feminism today and how conservative women can "take back feminism" to support women and men. Speaking about why conservative woman must get involved, Dr. Sommers explained:
"Mainstream women are going to have to rescue feminism from the feminists. Why not let it [feminism] fall by the weight of its own eccentricities? [Because] We badly need a reality-based, responsible women’s movement based on good information and respect for men and women."
Four NeW leaders joined together to participate on a student panel to share there experiences with NeW over the year: Anna Beavon from Meredith College discussed starting a NeW chapter, Blayne from Arizona State University shared the creation and implementation of the Gentlemen's Showcase on her campus, Danelle from Ohio State University talked about running a NeW chapter, and Elizabeth P. from the University of Kentucky discussed NeW and the Academy. These women gave a great picture of the strides NeW women are making on their campuses daily. NeW North Carolina Chair, Jessica Custer Anderson, closed the event by sharing a vision those in the room for continued involvement in NeW.
NeW also presented Annual Awards to some of its top leaders. Our New Chapter of the Year Award went to The King's College. Our Chapter of the Year Award went to Ohio State University. And our Enlightened Woman of the Year Award went to Blayne from ASU. Congratulations to these outstanding NeW Leaders!
NeW ended the day with a new media training session led by American Majority. NeW women learned tools and strategies for turning education into civic engagement, particular by using new media.
If you missed the Conference and would like more information about the event and NeW, please email NeW at info@enlightenedwomen.org. If you were at the Conference and are interested in getting more involved in NeW, please let us know. We are excited to help you expand conservative principles on your campus!
Stay tuned for more pictures from the event!
NeW Leaders from across the country join together at the National Conference.
From left to right: (top row) Elizabeth P., Sarah-Gordon, Blayne, Anna Beavon,
Cristina, Taylor, Kara, (bottom row): Rachel, Hannah, Chelsea W., Chelsea M.,
Karin Agness, Holly Carter, and Jessica Custer Anderson.