Terry McAuliffe's Conversation with Virginians

Causes and candidates supported by Heidi Li

« Feminists do not horse-trade women's rights to care for their bodies for Republican votes | Main | Second invited guest essay at 51 Percent; some other news and notes »

January 29, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


True that we need an emancipation movement but we won't and have not gotten anywhere calling ourselves feminists instead of women.

That doggon lable never hunted and was dead on arrival.


Molly Ivins died two years ago tomorrow (1/31). Apparently, some of her "friends" are getting messages from her and are remembering her by saying she would be loving Obama right now...

I don't know what Ivins would be writing if she were alive, but I'm going to do my OWN speculating that she wouldn't be jumping up for joy at what has transpired over the past year...esp. with regard to the use and abuse of women...

Molly believed in "raising more hell" and I wish she were here with us now. We are sorely in need of women with national stature to raise some hell!

When I called my House rep about the "stimulus package" and the games being played with the birth control section, I told the woman on the phone that I didn't know how she could stand it in that office and that women should rise up...including her!!!

Molly Ivins: 2 Years After Her Death, People Who Knew Her Are Putting Words into Her Mouth (Are They Holding Seances?)


It's going to take a strong woman to get Obama's attention. How about 51% of the population get together and send Michelle Obama their letters outlining the issues they would like to see being addressed by her husband. The key to each letter would be a red 51 stamped or written on the envelope. Enough of those would eventually get some attention and be read. That's my story.


Work from the bottom up not the top down. We need to foster strong girls and women. Obama is not going to do anything for women. Liberal Democrats have set women back 50 years maybe 100 with their treatment of female candidates in the last election. Feminism has been framed by men as trying to deny heterosexual women their sexuality, while men have offered to bestow on young women a sort of truncated sexuality so long as it serves male sexuality which is seen by young women as better than nothing. What I see are too many women who seek male approval and I see it especially in the corporate media. I think they do this because of the cultural acceptance of the profoundly stupid idea that men grant female sexuality or that female sexuality derives from male approval. We need to take back our power. We have let men define sex and they came up with pornography. Part of their pornography mantra is that women are not visually stimulated sexually. They also deemed that women's sexual fantasies are limited to how best to fit into male sexual fantasies. And corporate America has taken this load of crap and run with it. We don't need male approval of us or our sexuality. We do not need to by product to own our sexuality. We do not need gay men to design uncomfortable clothes and unwalkable shoes for us in order to be sexual. We do not need the media images of American geisha such as pageant Babes, porno babes, fashion models etc. in our faces. I think you can do more by starting an online magazine which would be free because the goal is to reach as many young women as possible. Leave out the offensive advertisers and the usual 10 "women's" articles that are repeated adnauseam, have great articles and emphasis women expressing and owning the half of their sexuality that is taboo in this society, the half where they sit on their average sweat panted bums happy as hell and check out hot men. All women pictured in this mag should be dead average looking and damn happy with that. So in other words a feminist publication that allows heterosexual women to own their sexuality regardless of how they look or whether they have a man. If feminists encourage young women to own their heterosexual sexuality they will be as popular as male institutions who think they can grant or withhold it.


Constance, is it remotely possible that gay men can also design wearable clothing and comfortable shoes for women? Honestly, it seems like you wish to swap "old rules" for "new rules" rather than emphasizing individuality.


This is a very astute column, Heidi! Thanks.

I couldn't believe that Hillary was not even mentioned as being an effective long-time co-sponsor on Lily's legislative effort!
I just read Kathlessn Parker's "Justs a Smirk away..." at Washington Post Jan. 30th where she states that Bush and Obama are two sides of same coin stylistically! She says Bush's was a confrontational "bring-'em on" style while Obama's is a "passive-aggressive Mr. Cool"...both of them with an exaggerated sense of self-empowerment!"....

Darren Hutchinson

Heidi -- you're right that we need more than Ledbetter. Rosa DeLauro and Hillary Clinton both introduced legislation last year (it was reintroduced) called the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would alter the substantive law on proving wage discrimination to make it easier for plaintiffs. Unlike the Ledbetter statute, this one really goes at the issue of wage discrimination. Ledbetter only relaxes the statute of limitations rules. But because most liberals are so euphoric over anything Obama does, they cannot even "hear" discussion of more progressive alternatives. The Paycheck Fairness Act passed in the House by an even larger vote than Ledbetter, but it was tabled in the Senate. I wonder who suggested that it get tabled?

I wrote about this in greater length:

The comments to this entry are closed.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Creative Commons License