A Blog of Our Own

2010-03-24T08:45:00.001-07:00

http://www.newsweek.com/id/235220

Why Women's History

2010-03-20T09:13:00.000-07:00

Why Women’s History

“I’m not a hero,” said Jesse Ames.¨ “I’m only doing what is right.”

What Jesse is doing is running the Red River Women’s Clinic in Fargo, North Dakota, the only medical facility in the state available to women who need to terminate their pregnancies. Although Cass County, where Fargo is located, counts in the 88% of all U.S. counties lacking an identifiable abortion provider, two female physicians, one from Texas, the other from Minnesota fly to Fargo and perform abortions twice a week, Jesse explained. The health center sees approximately 1,300 women each year, some drive over five hours to get there, many have no health insurance, but each one leaves with some form of birth control in her hands.

Red River has thus far escaped the violence inflicted upon other clinics in the nation, but the threat is ever-present. Jesse has had to brandish a stun gun to fend off aggressive protestors. She takes a different route home from work each day, always checking the rear view mirror, and her children use a different last name.

When I asked what led her to this work, she answered simply, “I took women’s history in school.”

Jesse is an heir to the rich legacy of second wave feminists’ determination to challenge the all-male canon and bring women into the historical narrative. We looked for inspiration in the lives of those before us, many from the civil rights movement, many excavated from the rich yet untapped soil of our distant past. Isabella Graham, defying formidable male opposition of the early republic, ventured without a chaperon through the notorious Five Points District in New York to assist the destitute of her sex; Harriet Jacobs, born a slave in North Carolina, endured unmitigated hardships, hiding in an attic for seven years so she could stay near her daughter and away from the horrific abuse of her master; Sarah Winnemucca, author of the first autobiography of a Native America woman, Life Among the Piutes, remained a tireless advocate for the rights of her people. Crippling restraints and staunched dreams had carved inner beings of indomitable strength.

We called these women role models. Our icons. Connecting to them urged us to continue fighting for equal footing in a soul-deflating society systematically forcing women into second place. Their stories served as both life raft and compass in the perilous uncharted seas of sexism. Not because they were perfect, but because they weren’t, they empowered us. We believed it was crucial for women and girls, but also for men and boys, nurtured on masculine superiority, to realize the sweeping range of women’s fortitude, tenacity and achievement.

I started teaching women’s history at Sarah Lawrence College in the late-1970s under the mentorship of the esteemed Gerda Lerner, a pioneer in the field. On my office door, I hung a poster proclaiming: Women’s History is a World Worth Fighting For. Our struggle back then, to establish the field as a separate discipline, was enhanced by the formation of the National Women’s History Project (NWHP) in 1980 by Molly Murphy MacGregor and four of her colleagues. The NWHP’s goal, “to broadcast women’s historical achievements,” initially took the form of lobbying Congress to designate March as National Women’s History Month, now celebrated all over the country.

The incorporation of women’s history into the curricula at colleges and universities across the nation created a sea change in how Americans viewed our past. Over the course of the next decade, feminist scholarship exploded, stimulating ever-more research and encouraging the formation of interdisciplinary courses. As women of color called for a more complex approach to women’s experiences, Black Women’s History emerged as a field in its own right. The abundance of organizations, conferences, journals and monographs dedicated to analyzing the interconnections of gender with class, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, cultural and, more recently, global disparities, have deepened our understanding of the relationships between different groups of women as well as between women and men.

I have been fortunate to have watched the delight and enthusiasm of students for whom women’s history is an ongoing discovery, a source of profound intellectual engagement, pride and self esteem, sometimes transformative, often a prod for action, but always a gift. It offers girls and young women an opportunity to understand the distribution of power and privilege in society as it affords them a new visibility in development of our nation..

The benefits of knowing one’s past seem so obvious, I assumed, naively perhaps, that women’s history would remain a permanent fixture in our national consciousness. But after surveying nearly 400 women of different ages and backgrounds, I discovered sadly that over the past fifteen years women are once again being marginalized in the master historical narrative. The majority of the respondents, especially those 35 years old and younger, had no opportunity to study women’s history and confessed to knowing very little about women’s accomplishments, challenges, or even their rights.

Women’s history courses today are an endangered species, according to Molly Murphy MacGregor, currently Executive Director of the NWHP. There have, of course, always been the naysayers like Conservative writer and policy-maker David Horowitz. His academia-bashing One Party Classroom, cataloguing what he considers the worst 150 courses taught at American schools, highlighted 60 focused on women and gender. Horowitz’s charge— women’s studies courses are taught by ideologues rather than scholars—is nothing new, but in the current economic climate, with women’s studies courses (which include women’s history) on the chopping block, right wing propaganda can have a destructive impact.

The late educator Myra Sadker once said, “Each time a girl opens a book and reads a womanless history, she learns she is worth less.” I would go even further and suggest that she learns that the lives of those before her are also worth less. The Stupak Amendment’s addition to the House Healthcare Reform Bill stimulated much discussion about the generational divide within the pro-choice movement. Women, born after the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973, do not feel the same sense of urgency about choice—so the argument goes—compared to older women whose lives were shaped by the illegality of abortion. And while many members of Gen X and younger are committed to fighting for reproductive justice, there are others who told me they “simply can’t imagine a world without access to abortion.”
Understandable. Also rectifiable.
It’s hard to read pre-Roe stories (such as those reported by Dr. Edward Keemer of Washington, D. C.) and not imagine the absolute desperation of his young patients: “I had treated a woman…[who] still had the straightened-out coat hanger hanging from her vagina… Over the years I was to encounter hundreds of other women who had resorted to imaginative but deadly methods of self-induced abortion.…A sixteen-year-old girl…died after douching with a cupful of bleach...”

We forget the dark and tragic stories of long ago at our own peril. Not knowing your past is a banishment of sorts, cutting you off from powerful connections and deepest parts of your being. It limits the opportunity to understand the multiple experiences that have shaped the nation, shaped your life as a citizen in it and will shape possibilities for the future. “Writing Women Back Into History,” the NWHP’s theme for its Thirtieth Anniversary Celebration, hopes to reverse this trend.

Throughout the month, workshops, symposiums and speeches honoring the vivid heritage of diverse American women will be held across the country. Even if you can’t get to one of the formal events, there’s much you can do: visit your local library and take out some books on women’s history to read to your children or talk with their schools about how the contributions of more than half the population are woven into the curricula, not just in March but for the entire year. This might be a good time for your book club to add women’s memoirs and diaries to its roster or to ask your elderly neighbor about her youth, I bet she has a story or two to tell.

As for me—I’m going to dust off my Women’s History is A World Worth Fighting For poster, hang it up on my door again and get to work.

Barbara J. Berg, Ph.D. is on the Board of the National Women’s History Project and author of Sexism in America: Alive, Well and Ruining Our Future (Chicago Review Press, Sept. 2009).

¨ Not her real name

2010-03-10T15:14:00.000-08:00

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/national_womens_history_projec.html

2009-12-09T11:42:00.001-08:00

http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejustice/144329/how_our_health_system_screws_over_women/

http://community.feministing.com/2009/12/rallying-for-womens-rights.html

2009-12-09T11:34:00.000-08:00

http://community.feministing.com/2009/12/rallying-for-womens-rights.html

Books: Sexism in America

2009-12-09T11:30:00.000-08:00

Books: Sexism in America

The Stupak Amendment

2009-12-09T10:17:00.001-08:00

The thunderous applause greeting the announcement of the House’s health care reform bill, effectively curtailing women’s access to abortion, drowned out the cries and screams from our nation’s recent past. The cries and screams of everywoman, wretchedly pregnant, with no options but to take matters into her own hands.We don’t talk much about these women today: the single women, poor women, women who already were caring for far too many little ones, women whose boyfriends or husbands would beat them or leave them if they had a baby, women who wanted to leave their boyfriends or husbands, women who wanted to finish their education or hold onto a job, were too young, too immature, too old, had been raped, were victims of incest, or just plain didn’t want to be mothers.But fortunately, there are those who remember.The words of Dr. Edward Keemer of Washington D.C. help us imagine the absolute desperation these women must have felt:
I had treated a woman . . . [who] still had the straightened-out coat hanger hanging from her vagina. Some... died from air embolisms or infections. Over the years I was to encounter hundreds of other women who had resorted to imaginative but deadly methods of self-induced abortion... some would swallow quinine or turpentine. Others would insert a corrosive potassium permanganate tablet into their vaginas... A sixteen-year-old girl... died after douching with a cupful of bleach. During the 1960s, a million women are estimated to have had illegal abortions. Of those who survived, untold numbers became sterile. By one count seven thousand women died from botched abortions in 1966 (compared to three thousand American deaths that year in Vietnam). Hard as it is verify these statistics, what we know is that the deaths and disabilities from illegal abortions fell disproportionately on poor women and women of color.Maybe Bart Stupak and the merry band of 64 Democrats and 176 Republicans who voted for his amendment missed the memo, but the last time I checked abortion was still legal in this country. Now, though thanks to their cynical maneuvering, it will be beyond the reach of millions of women who need it, possibly forcing them to resort to the horrifying options of Dr. Keemer’s patients.According to the National Organization of Women, the Stupak Amendment, if it remains in the final version of health insurance reform, will:
Prevent women receiving tax subsidies from using their own money to purchase private insurance that covers abortion;
Prevent women participating in the public health insurance exchange administered by private insurance companies from using 100 percent of their own money to purchase private insurance that covers abortion;
Prevent low-income women from accessing abortion entirely, in many cases.As Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist Herblock commented wryly during the Reagan years, “It’s simple -- if you could afford to have children, you could have an abortion.”What Bart Stupak and Co. want goes way beyond the thirty year old Hyde Amendment, still in place, that forbids federal funds for abortion. There is a chance that the House abortion restrictions will be modified in committee, but I’m not counting on it. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) has already suggested introducing a measure similar to the Stupak Amendment in the Senate Bill, and Harry Reid will have a hard time fighting the anti-abortionists especially since he personally does not support choice.Dark clouds are looming on the horizon for women’s fundamental right to self-determination. By pandering to the hard-lobbying U.S. Catholic Bishops who demanded the elimination of abortion coverage from healthcare reform, we will now have to contend with a newly energized religious intrusion into our policies. The movement to grant fetuses, even eggs, personhood, supported by the religious right, is thriving.Bills have recently been introduced into the state legislatures of Michigan and Tennessee, with the ultimate goal of making abortion murder under the Constitution regardless of the any Supreme Court decision. The Stupak Amendment is another tactic in the increasingly organized and well-financed drive to deprive women of their most fundamental rights.When President Obama first applauded the House bill he not only didn’t express disappointment over the compromise on women’s health care, he didn’t even mention it! Only a day and a half later did he issue a tepid statement about restoring women to the status quo, steadfastly refusing to utter the dreaded a-word.Maybe we’re seeing something many of us have tried to overlook. But it’s hard to forget the speed with which the president eliminated provisions to expand access to affordable family planning, cost effective legislation which would have helped millions of low-income women, from the economic stimulus bill. Or to overlook his use of the term partial-birth abortion in the third presidential debate, a phrase deplored by all who are pro-choice.I’m starting to get the uneasy feeling that the Obama administration, like so many Democrats, considers women’s issues as marginal, even separate from their Progressive agenda. How can they believe they are protecting a woman’s health, while taking away her reproductive freedom?The answer is they don’t.This is only one more example of the ongoing rollback of women’s rights that we have been ignoring at our own peril. It’s time to say enough! We hear a lot these days about being on the right side of history. If we, as a nation really believe that, than how can we return to a history filled with the cries and screams of our foremothers?Women put Obama in office; now we have to call in our chips.

Rallying For Women's rights

2009-12-09T10:13:00.000-08:00

Rallying for Women's Rights
Rallying for Women's Rights
The thunderous applause greeting the recent announcement of the House's healthcare reform bill, effectively curtailing women's access to abortion, drowned out the cries and screams from our nation's recent past. The cries and screams of everywoman, wretchedly pregnant, with no options but to take matters into her own hands. We don't talk much about these women today: the single women, poor women, women who already were caring for far too many little ones, women whose boyfriends or husbands would beat them or leave them if they had a baby, women who wanted to leave their boyfriends or husbands, women who wanted to finish their education or hold onto a job, were too young, too immature, too old, had been raped, were victims of incest, or just plain didn't want to be mothers.But fortunately, there are those who remember.
The words of Dr. Edward Keemer of Washington D.C. help us imagine the absolute desperation these women must have felt:
I had treated a woman . . . [who] still had the straightened-out coat hanger hanging from her vagina. Some . . . died from air embolisms or infections. Over the years I was to encounter hundreds of other women who had resorted to imaginative but deadly methods of self-induced abortion . . . some would swallow quinine or turpentine. Others would insert a corrosive potassium permanganate tablet into their vaginas. . . . A sixteen-year-old girl . . . died after douching with a cupful of bleach.
During the 1960s, a million women are estimated to have had illegal abortions. Of those who survived, untold numbers became sterile. By one count seven thousand women died from botched abortions in 1966 (compared to three thousand American deaths that year in Vietnam). Hard as it is verify these statistics, what we know is that the deaths and disabilities from illegal abortions fell disproportionately on poor women and women of color.
Maybe Bart Stupak and the merry band of 64 Democrats and 176 Republicans who voted for his amendment missed the memo, but the last time I checked abortion was still legal in this country. Now, though thanks to their cynical maneuvering, it will be beyond the reach of millions of women who need it, possibly forcing them to resort to the horrifying options of Dr. Keemer's patients.
According to the National Organization of Women, the Stupak Amendment, if it remains in the final version of health insurance reform, will:? Prevent women receiving tax subsidies from using their own money to purchase private insurance that covers abortion;? Prevent women participating in the public health insurance exchange administered by private insurance companies from using 100 percent of their own money to purchase private insurance that covers abortion;? Prevent low-income women from accessing abortion entirely, in many cases.
As Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist Herblock commented wryly during the Reagan years, "It's simple--if you could afford to have children, you could have an abortion."
What Bart Stupak and Co. want goes way beyond the thirty year old Hyde Amendment, still in place, that forbids federal funds for abortion. There is a chance that the House abortion restrictions will be modified or eliminated in the final bill, but I'm not counting on it. The anti-choice Senate crowd has been very vocal about want they want, and Harry Reid, who personally does not support choice, is going to have to make concessions to them.
Dark clouds are looming on the horizon for women's fundamental right to self-determination. By pandering to the hard-lobbying U.S. Catholic Bishops who demanded the elimination of abortion coverage from healthcare reform, we will now have to contend with a newly energized religious intrusion into our policies. The movement to grant fetuses, even eggs, personhood, supported by the religious right, is thriving. Bills have recently been introduced into the state legislatures of Michigan and Tennessee, with the ultimate goal of making abortion murder under the Constitution regardless of the any Supreme Court decision. The Stupak Amendment is another tactic in the increasingly organized and well-financed drive to deprive women of their most fundamental rights.
When President Obama, first applauded the House bill he not only didn't express disappointment over the compromise on women's healthcare, he didn't even mention it! Only a day and a half later did he issue a tepid statement about restoring women to the status quo, steadfastly refusing to utter the dreaded a-word.
Maybe we're seeing something many of us have tried to overlook. But it's hard to forget the speed with which the president eliminated provisions to expand access to affordable family planning, cost effective legislation which would have helped millions of low-income women, from the economic stimulus bill. Or to overlook his use of the term partial-birth abortion in the third presidential debate, a phrase deplored by all who are pro-choice.
I'm starting to get the uneasy feeling that the Obama administration, like so many Democrats, considers women's issues as marginal, even separate from their Progressive agenda. How can they believe they are protecting a woman's health, while taking away her reproductive freedom?
The answer is they don't.
This is only one more example of the ongoing rollback of women's rights that we have been ignoring at our own peril. We hear a lot these days about being on the right side of history. If we, as a nation really believe that, than how can we return to a history filled with the cries and screams of our foremothers? Pro-choice women and men from all over the country are gathering in Washington on December 3rd to rally against keeping the Stupak Amendment in the final bill.
Women put Obama in office it's time to call in our chips. Barbara J. Berg is the author of Sexism in America: Alive, Well and Ruining Our Future (Chicago Review Press, Sept, 2009)

Inequality the new normal, historian says - thestar.com

2009-12-09T09:18:00.000-08:00

Inequality the new normal, historian says - thestar.com

Getting Real About Women's Progress

2009-11-24T11:42:00.001-08:00

Maybe we’re all suffering from bad-news overload. That’s the only explanation I can come up with for the media’s uncritical embrace of the often erroneous feel-good Shriver Report: A Woman’s Nation Changes Everything, essentially declaring an end to “the battle of the sexes.”Time magazine, writing about the report, claims, “the argument over where women belong is over.” Try telling that to Andrea Wolff-Yakubovich whose boss fired her from her position as finance director for a Denver-based John Elway AutoNation dealership when she disclosed she was expecting, telling her husband, “She should be barefoot, pregnant and at home.” (Really!)And I seem to remember not too long ago a lot of angry GOP males urging General Stanley McChrystal to put Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi “in her place,” because of her statements about the war in Afghanistan.Notwithstanding all the real gains we’ve seen from the second wave women’s movement of the 1970s, the United States ranks 27th out of a total of 130 countries, behind Cuba and Lithuania, according to the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report of 2008.We are the only industrialized nation that doesn’t offer paid maternity leave. And like Wolff-Yakubovich, hundreds of women, in stark violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, are being fired when they become pregnant. The United States is one of a very few westernized nations to leave day care almost completely to the unregulated private market. And a new study has just disclosed that more than a quarter of our nation’s schoolchildren are unsupervised and alone after the regular school day because of the scarcity of funded after-school programs.Unlike some other 145 countries, the United States doesn’t assure all workers paid sick days for their own illnesses or to care for a sick family member, and women pay hundreds of dollars more than men for identical health insurance overage. Our infant mortality rate is appalling -- 29th in the world -- and although the American Academy of Pediatrics “urges mothers to breastfeed exclusively for six months,” we differ from 107 countries in not protecting a working woman’s right to breastfeed. In our nation’s capital the mortality rate is four times as great for black infants as for white ones.Unfortunately, it’s not just at hedge funds, as Time suggests, where women are facing strong headwinds. At four year colleges across the nation, women make up 50% of instructors and assistant professors, but are only 27% of tenured faculty. They are 50% of managers and professionals and only 2.6% of CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. The majority of working women in America still work in low-paid service jobs with little flexibility and few benefits. And thanks to the gender pay gap that starts right out of college and continues to grow, a woman working full-time her entire life makes on average $700,000 less than a man.For the first time since 1918 women’s life expectancy is shortening. Women across the nation are dying from treatable chronic diseases. “[In no state] do women enjoy satisfactory health status,” according to the National Women’s Health Report Card issued by the National Women’s Law Center. Women present with different symptoms and respond to different medicines and therapies in a variety of diseases including strokes and heart attacks, but they are still not included in medical clinical trials.Intimate partner assaults on women are soaring, yet everywhere we turn -- from advertising to electronic gaming -- we are bombarded with images of violence against women. We have the highest teen pregnancy rate in the western world and one out of every four adolescent girls has some form of STD.Our reproductive rights are in jeopardy with the far right waging a quietly successful campaign to have fetuses granted personhood on the state level. If that drive succeeds, then Supreme Court or no Supreme Court, abortion will be declared murder under the U.S. Constitution and will be illegal throughout the land.So -- instead of celebrating how far women have come, we should be asking why, after so many years, we still have so far to go.[Barbara J. Berg, Ph.D., is the author of Sexism in America: Alive, Well and Ruining Our Future (Chicago Review Press, 2009).]The Rag Blog

What's Really Scary About Halloween

2009-10-26T11:23:00.000-07:00

“I want it, Mommy, puhleeze . . . puhleeze!”
A little girl no older than six was sprawled across the aisle, clinging to a Halloween costume and screaming in a voice high-pitched enough to break glass. Shoppers bunched up around her, my daughter, Ali, and I among them. There were a few irritated murmurs and groans of exasperation.

It was one of those please-let-me-vanish-into-thin-air mothering moments. I could see the effort the mom was making to stay calm, bending over her daughter, reasoning quietly. But everything she did only resulted in more shrieking. “I want it!” “I want it!”
The man next to me covered his ears. Finally the mother, flushing with humiliation, peeled her daughter off the large plastic bag. Now we got to see what all the fuss was about.
I couldn’t believe it. A Naughty Nurse costume!

It was impossible not to stare. The large picture showed a young girl dressed in white fishnet stockings, high heels, and a satiny candy-stripper mini with a matching bustier. One hand was at her thrust-out hip, the other holding a syringe as if it were a sex toy.
I directed my gaze to the bottom row and took in the other costumes--Transylvania Temptress, Frisky French Maid, and Little Miss Handy Candy--all with shiny bright fabrics, lots of sparkles, knee-high boots, plunging necklines, and fluffy boas. How could these be for the six-year-old set? But there they were, and all in easy reach of little hands. A clash of parent-child wills just waiting to happen.

Meanwhile, the situation on the ground was rapidly deteriorating. The little girl was writhing on the floor staging a level-five hissy fit. You could almost see the flashing words in the bubble over her mom’s head: “I’m not a bad mother. Really I’m not.” I watched her expression go from horrified to resigned. With rapid-fire motion, she yanked a fresh Naughty Nurse off the hook and scooped up her daughter. I gave her a sympathetic smile, but she’d already turned her head, anxiously looking for the checkout counter.

Other stores have pretty much the same selection. Pirate Wench, Instant Bunny (complete with the Playboy Bunny bowtie ) Major Flirt ( this year’s contribution to the military) and Little Bo Peep in a corset and lace petticoat. But what’s really scary are the pouty faces and beckoning thrust out hips of preteens ( and younger) modeling these clothes more rightfully belong in the window displays of seedy downtown sex shops..

“I wondered if I’d accidentally wondered into ‘Sluts R Us,’” Rachel Mosteller wrote on Blogging Baby about her search for her children’s Halloween costumes. She hoped her little ones would have no idea about the meaning behind names like Handy Candy--a sentiment widely shared by other moms who’d had similar experiences.

While Halloween for boys hasn’t changed much--the same blood-dripping masks and ghoulish garb--“costumes for girls have traded silly and sweet for skimpy and sexy.” “ It’s a strange time we live in when half the doctors are women, and half the lawyers are women, and all the little girls are prancing around in sexy costumes,” said Albany family therapist Lindy Guttman.

Her comment is right on target. Precisely because of the anxiety over women’s achievements, marketers are pushing marginalizing costumes on our daughters, reinforcing gender stereotypes. Instead of dressing up as a scientist, engineer, teacher or Dora the Explorer girls are parading around as chamber maids in a low-cut bodies and mini skirts. Tarty-tween costumes for Halloween are part of the sexualization of young women and girls—a trend going on for many years..

Unlike healthy sexuality, the sexualization of girls provides a very narrow definition of femaleness with a focus exclusively on appearance. This skewed identity “leads to a host of negative emotional consequences such as shame, anxiety, and even self-disgust,” says a recent report released by the American Psychological Association.

When sexual allure becomes the only path to power and self-worth, the role of achievement, talent, and being a decent person are diminished. Reduced concentration at school, eating disorders, depression, and unsafe and early sex are often the result. The onslaught of sexual images is encouraging a whole generation of girls to think about and treat their bodies as sexual objects, things for others’ use.

No parent wants to be Oscar the Grouch on Halloween and overrule a child’s choice of a costume, but if a group of parents get together and set up boundaries on what is and isn’t acceptable for dress-up, it will be a lot easier to steer your little goblin in the right direction. It’s also a good idea to organize an email blast to manufacturers and tell them why you’re not buying Miss Sexy Sergeant for your fifth grader. Or protest outside a store selling sexy costumes for the younger set and help to bring community-wide attention to issues of sexualizing girls and young women.

Women have a tremendous amount of power, but we have to use it to be effective.

Sexism Kills...In America, Too

2009-10-06T14:48:00.000-07:00

D. Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn in their new book, Half the Sky, present a horrific account of violence towards women around the world. By comparison, gender discrimination in richer nations, including the United States, is far more benign, according to the authors. It is simply a matter of not getting girls on male athletic teams, an unwanted sexual remark from a boss, the gender pay gap. While the brutality abroad certainly demands our attention, it shouldn’t obscure the potentially deadly dimensions of misogyny on our own shores.

The United States ranks 27^th in the 2008 Global Gender Gap Report published by the World Economic Forum, putting us behind Cuba and Lithuania. We’re only 37^th in Health and Survival. Calculated by the World Health Organization, this category estimates how long men and women can expect to live in good health, considering the years lost to disease, malnutrition and violence.

Violence against women is rampant in our society and popular culture. Everything from increasingly graphic and available pornography, to the lyrics of our many well known rappers, to “Hunting Bambi” videos in which men in combat dress driving jeeps hunt naked women with paint ball guns. Our most popular forms of entertainment—television and electronic gaming— feature new and ever-more ingenious ways of slaughtering women. Numerous studies have documented the high correlation between violent entertainment and real-life acts of aggression. And we’ve seen how mass killings in America have targeted girls: in the Amish school house and more recently in a Pittsburgh sports club. But what we haven’t seen is an outcry against the systematic murder. “Why Aren’t We Shocked?” the New York Times columnist Bob Herbert (the rare mainstream journalist to make this point) asks about the murder in the school? There would be an outcry, wrote Herbert, if it were black or white people, Jews or Christians or Muslims who were selectively killed. But because it was “only” women we barely notice it. It’s just the same-old, same old.

“I have been dragged up 36 iron steps by …my hair,” a woman said and this was far from the worst story I heard. She is one of the 4 to 6 million women abused in this country each year by their intimate partners. Unless it’s a celebrity, like the late swimsuit model Jasmine Fiore, murdered by her husband, we rarely get news of the 3 women every day killed by their present or former partners. And the numbers are increasing. “We’re not just seeing an uptick, but we’re seeing an uptick off the charts,” said Officer Steve Frazer, Commander of the St. Paul Family Violence Unit. American teens are also “experiencing alarmingly high levels of abuse in their dating relationships,” reports a June, 2009 study by the Family Violence Prevention Fund. The study concurs with experts in the field attributing the escalating violence to the poor economy: the laid-off abuser has more time on his hands, and with cutbacks in funds for shelters and hotlines his would-be victim has fewer avenues for escape.

Domestic violence, however, has been on the raise before the recession of 2008. The “soaring levels” of abuse are also a function of the aching male psyche. Already bruised by the terror attacks on our own soil and the seemingly unwinnable wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and our tarnished image aboard, the manly man is being further hammered by the economic meltdown. Beyond all the trappings of masculinity—being an ace athlete, a sound decision maker, a soldier—what really makes men feel like men? “Being a good family breadwinner,” says a two-decade long survey conducted by the Yankelovich Monitor, reinforcing numerous academic studies. Historically threats to feelings of masculinity result in greater subjugation and mistreatment of women. Buried under the myth of a post feminist society, sexism reigns in America.

The FBI estimates over 100,000 young American women and children are currently being “forced to trade sex for money,” girls like fifteen year old Debbie kidnapped in front of her Phoenix home, gang-raped, held at gunpoint, forced to have sex with approximately 50 men and kept locked in a dog crate until her rescue forty days after her abduction. But Debbie was fortunate to have a family that was able keep on top of the investigation until she was found.

But what happens to girls who flee dangerous home situations? Many of them end up as Prostitutes, virtual slaves to their pimps. They are branded, beaten and forced to turn tricks until they meet their quotas. These girls are considered “throwaways,” invisible to society, according to Rachel Lloyd founder of Girls Educational and Mentoring Services. Her organization helps young women who have escaped commercial sexual exploitation—“the lucky ones.” A study by The American Journal of Epidemiology found the average age of death of prostitutes to be thirty-four.

And sexism is shortening women’s lives in other ways as well. For the first time since 1918, women’s life expectancy is dropping. Emphysema, kidney failure, lung cancer, cardiovascular disease and diabetes are taking a huge toll among poor women of all races. Not one state in fifty received a satisfactory grade in a women’s health report card issued by the National Women’s Law Center. And our infant mortality rates are appalling. Data released in October, 2008 from the Centers for Disease Control ranks the United States 29^th globally, with Non-Hispanic black and American Indian women having the highest rates. In our nation’s Capital the death rate of black infants in 4 times the rate for white newborns. CDC researchers Marian F. Mac Dorman, PhD. and T.J. Mathews note, “The relative position of the United States in comparison to countries with the lowest infant mortality rates appears to be worsening.”

Women’s inability to receive adequate prenatal and medical care for themselves and for their babies is inexorably linked to gender discrimination. Startling new evidence has revealed a large gap in the cost of health insurance plans between what men and women pay, a difference amounting to hundreds of dollars more for women. Race isn’t allowed to be a factor in setting rates; neither should we allow sex to be a factor. And women have fewer employment and advancement opportunities than men, are more likely to work part time, less likely to have health benefits, pensions and unemployment insurance, and when they do work full time are paid only seventy-seven cents to the male dollar. Over the course of a lifetime, the gender wage gap of the average working woman results in a loss of $700,000— a huge sum that could have gone a long way towards assuring better nutrition and healthcare for a woman and her family.

And gender discrimination, long excluding women from clinical trials, has skewed the medical community’s understanding of serious, often fatal diseases. More women die each year from stroke and heart attacks than men, according to the American Heart Association and only 8% of doctors nationwide know this. It’s exceedingly common for women to be misdiagnosed and given inappropriate therapies because they may present symptoms unlike men’s and respond to dissimilar medications and dosages. “For too long women have been treated as ‘little men’…”said Phyllis Greenberger, president of the Society for Women’s Health Research, an organization committed to ensuring women’s inclusion and retention in clinical trails. “What it amounts to,” she said “is women’s health getting really short shrift.”

Sexism is killing women and their children here and aboard. The methods may differ but the horrendous outcome is the same. So yes, we must fight for justice for women worldwide, but we must also fight for it at home.