Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Women. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Women. Sort by date Show all posts

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Politics Rules Litigious Society Is Women’s Fault Probably Since Receiving Right To Vote

  A bill that would pave the way for women to more easily litigate their way to pay equality failed in Congress for the second time in two years according to The New York Times. The Senate, to be exact, where Lilly M. Ledbetter, the woman whose name was attached to a 2009 law that ensured equal pay for women, watched from the gallery as the vote was 52 to 47 in favor of an open debate on the legislation, 8 votes short of the required 60. 

  Tuesday’s bill sought to bar companies from retaliating against workers who inquire about pay disparities and open pathways for female employees to sue for punitive damages in cases of paycheck discrimination. The same bill that failed a procedural vote in the Senate when no Republican supported it in 2010.

  Both the Times and Reuters saw the measure was part of the Senate Democrats’ continuing effort to highlight divisions with Senate Republicans over women’s issues to force Republicans to take difficult votes on bills focused on domestic violence, wage discrimination and other matters.

  The only Republican to denounce the measure on the floor was Senator Dean Heller of Nevada, who has authored his own less sweeping legislation. Mr. Heller said, “Let me be clear: pay discrimination based on gender is unacceptable.” And, “Despite the political rhetoric around here, everyone agrees on this fact. The question is, will the Paycheck Fairness Act actually address workplace inequality? And the simple answer is no.”

  But Democrats tried framing the issue as a broader economic one. “Middle-class families need the economic security,” said Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan. And Senator Mary Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana, acknowledged Republicans’ central complaint that the bill would create litigation and potentially onerous compliance issues for small businesses. But she also said: “Where are these women supposed to go? What are they supposed to do? Have an appointment with their congressman? Show the congressman their paycheck?”

  Democrats have repeatedly harped on the point that women make about 77 cents to the male dollar or based on median hourly pay, 86 percent as much as men, according to the most recent Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

  The Times states that even before the vote, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, criticized Mitt Romney as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, and his Republican colleagues for failing to take a position on the bill. Mr. Reid said, “They want to stick their heads in the sand and ignore the reality.” Then Mr. Reid went on to perform a legislative trick of his own voting against the measure as he’d then be able to procedurally call the legislation back to the floor again. Ms. Mikulski, of Maryland, also promised that would happen while brandishing a red lipstick as her weapon in a post-legislative news conference where the Democrat’s soapbox was rounded out by Nevada’s Senator Reid introducing Ms. Ledbetter, who the bill was named for. “Paycheck fairness is near and dear to my heart,” Ms. Ledbetter said.
  During a different news conference held after the vote, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said Republicans were justified voting against the legislation. “We don’t think America suffers from a lack of litigation.” While President Obama said, “It is incredibly disappointing that in this make-or-break moment for the middle class, Senate Republicans put partisan politics ahead of American women and their families.”
  But Republican critics said the legislation would allow women to pursue punitive damages in wage discrimination cases that would encourage too many frivolous court cases. “Unfortunately, the only winners under this legislation would be trial lawyers, giving them a windfall,” said Nevada’s Republican Senator Heller. “This legislation opens the door to frivolous lawsuits which already cost our economy billions of dollars every year.” And where does that money perhaps trickle? Lawyers have a pipeline to vacation homes on the shores of Afghanistan? Money doesn’t trickle from lawyers' pockets too? Granted they’re probably tighter with their dough than the desperate poor, but no doubt their intent to make so much is to spend it too. Maybe not as much on their female secretaries as they’d like, but there are already laws covering those fair wages. 
  But is it true since lawyers are so influential that any law that comes down the pike is a financial boondoggle for that industry? Probably not if legislative lobbyists are lawyers who are quite proficient in revenue raising whether laws are passed or not. Handlers’ fees come whether anything makes it to court or not. Lawyers are among our smartest and resourceful people. No matter what potential laws are deemed less worthy of enforcement, Congress is hardly protecting us from lawyers. Knowing where the money is they must make the best friends Congress has.
  It is true our litigious society is stifling. Yet a fact women are discriminated against. Wouldn’t any kind of law against that lead to less lawsuits and not more when one equal person making more for the same job is a potential lawsuit whether they’re a man or woman or not? Maybe by trying to make this a non-gender issue ignores it’s a dominant gender issue. 
  Senator Barbara Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland, said, “It’s a very sad day here in the United States Senate,” after the vote. Apparently unaware its women’s fault lawyers get to keep their vote too.
June 6 - 13, 2016
Politics Rules Litigious Society Is Women’s Fault Probably Since Receiving Right To Vote

6/6/2012 concluded: Senator Barbara Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland, said, “It’s a very sad day here in the United States Senate,” after the vote. Apparently unaware its women’s fault lawyers get to keep their vote too.
  What I could make out is ending the previous essay - Apparently unaware its women's fault lawyers get to keep their vote too - meant women's independence even enabled lawyers' freedom to remain possible, too. Laws, rules, custom, to the contrary. Women have done as much and more than all the mortal saints accredited with contributing to society's betterment.
  Well. Lauding June 6 as D Day seemed less in vogue than it's been in even recent years. That momentous day from "a good war." I didn't forget. I started this reassessed essay, June 6, 2016, just as was coincidentally done June 6, 2012. When better to write about women's standing in society than D Day. Because while it should be hard to believe women's status is still held at bay, what's more incredible is our whole economies, focus, and patriotism, are all still linked to the foundation of leverage in war.
  No. Women, and men, having equal rights was fought for, and possibly much more diplomatically than the rest of the world settles differences. Subjugation was and is an unethical tradition and until that fact is faced nothing will ever be. Not even the excuses. 
Women on Currency Why not? 
And Eleanor on the dime too with Franklin!
May the custom of fairness prevail.

The liberation of women stands between us and an objectively operating world.
Women Are Progress' Barometer
Woman’s Rights Members at the 1st convention 
in Seneca Falls, N.Y.

Monday, August 20, 2012

Augusta National Noteworthily Accepts Women?

August 20, 2012

  The New York Times headline, Augusta National to Add First Two Female Members, By KAREN CROUSE, notes some particulars as Augusta National Golf Club, the private club that hosts The Masters, and has been under attack over the past decade because of its all-male membership, announced it had added two female members on Monday. Former United States Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice and South Carolina businesswoman, Darla Moore.
  “This is a joyous occasion,” Billy Payne the, on vacation and unavailable for further comment, Augusta National chairman said in a statement released by the club, adding, “These accomplished women share our passion for the game of golf and both are well known and respected by our membership.” Mr. Payne’s statement also includes, “This is a significant and positive time in our club’s history.” And “on behalf of our membership, I wanted to take this opportunity to welcome them and all of our new members into the Augusta family.”
  The Times recounts that in April, at Mr. Payne’s annual news conference before the Masters, he deflected questions about the absence of female club members. Augusta National’s membership policies had become a major talking point again because I.B.M., one of three principal sponsors of the Masters, had elevated Virginia M. Rometty to chief executive and the previous four chief executives of the company had been given club membership. The lack of an invitation for Ms. Rometty sparked a national discussion during the week of the tournament, with even President Obama and Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential nominee, voicing the opinion that the club should open its doors to women. An obvious infringement on states’, clubs’ and individuals’ rights.
  Ms. Rice, 57, served as national security adviser and secretary of state under President George W. Bush, and despite her public disagreeing with some details of that administration’s atrocities she proved herself an able team player. She is a professor at the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University, where she has also been provost. A proven well run university where if anyone objects to her power there, certainly no one has gained prominent national recognition for any objection. The Times states Ms. Rice was considered a likely candidate for Augusta National membership if it became open to women.
  Ms. Rice said in a statement released by the club, “I have visited Augusta National on several occasions and look forward to playing golf, renewing friendships and forming new ones through this very special opportunity. I have long admired the important role Augusta National has played in the traditions and history of golf. I also have an immense respect for the Masters tournament and its commitment to grow the game of golf, particularly with youth, here in the United States and throughout the world.”
  The other new woman, whose implication is also that she won’t do anything either to upset the status quo is Ms. Moore, 58, vice president of Rainwater, a private investment company founded by her husband, Richard Rainwater. She rose to banking success, becoming the highest paid woman in the industry and first woman to be profiled on the cover of Fortune magazine. The University of South Carolina business school is named after her and the former Augusta National chairman Hootie Johnson described Ms. Moore as a “good friend” in a statement. As with Mr. Johnson, Ms. Moore is a South Carolina native, a graduate of the University of South Carolina, and banker.
  Opened in 1932, Augusta National added its first black male member in 1990. Women had been allowed to play at the club as guests of members. Then in 2002 Martha Burk of the National Council of Women’s Organizations began a campaign that urged the club to include women before the 2003 Masters and the then chairman, Hootie answered, “There may well come a day, when women will be invited to join our membership. But that timetable will be ours, and not at the point of a bayonet.” The instrument that we can also assume was used to keep women out?
  The Times then prints the sycophantic assessment of Amy Alcott, a Hall of Fame golfer, who has played Augusta National as a guest. She was in the middle of a charity tournament at Deepdale Golf Club in Manhasset, N.Y. on Monday when she found out through phone messages that women had been admitted to Augusta National as members. She said, “It is a great thing that it has happened.” Ms. Alcott, who said she was paired with an Augusta National member but had not discussed the news with him, added: “People have been waiting for this. Nobody functions well with an ultimatum. I said it would happen when people least expect it.” Oh my, that’s what this announcement is? Now when the club can demonstrate how it stands politically is when the announcement is least expected? Or rather right on schedule?
  The Times points out that the PGA Tour prevents courses with a discriminatory membership policy from hosting its tournaments, but in May the tour commissioner, Tim Finchem, said that when it came to Augusta National the Masters was “too important” to the tour’s interests. Once again 2012 seems right on schedule for acknowledging PGA rules? Hardly, when, as is obvious, the checkbooks wrote the amendments.
  In a statement released Monday, Mr. Finchem said, “At a time when women represent one of the fastest growing segments in both playing and following the game of golf, this sends a positive and inclusive message for our sport.” He forgot to mention how, all along, he was ‘talking about’ how the announcement was coming in such a timely fashion?
  Timely, except for one thing. Male leveraging of females from the halls of power has existed for centuries and it’s doubtful accepting two obvious team members signifies an advancement by women. However a real demonstration of women’s influence would be if the CEO of IBM is really allowed to demonstrate any power of her own, by pulling the plug on that sponsorship. But, for the record, I watch The Masters every year and love that tournament. So, when can we expect a Women’s Masters that matters? Huh?
? ? - ..., 2017
Augusta National Noteworthily Accepts Women?
8/20/2012 concluded: Timely, except for one thing. Male leveraging of females from the halls of power has existed for centuries and it’s doubtful accepting two obvious team members signifies an advancement by women. However a real demonstration of women’s influence would be if the CEO of IBM is really allowed to demonstrate any power of her own, by pulling the plug on that sponsorship. But, for the record, I watch The Masters every year and love that tournament. So, when can we expect a Women’s Masters that matters? Huh?


Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Trust Women Conference

Trust Women Conference
LIVE Broadcast
For Reuters, under the headline, Trust Women Conference: Women caught in clash between law and culture, Katie Nguyen writes of exactly why this two-day event in London, dedicated to the world-wide emancipation of women, is so necessary. Why unequal and unfair treatment needs to be gotten straight, and put behind us, once and for all. Ms. Nguyen's eloquent take on the matter should be read without my paraphrasing. Her quoting of the speakers lays out precisely what everyone should be aware of if the tragedy of the subjugation of women is to be overReuters, as well, covers the desperate trafficking of Myanmar women who are exploited in as wives in China.

Centuries. Of course people realize women were taken advantage of for centuries. Why complacency and acceptance made sexism's continuation possible for generations after being realized as a major root why the modern world hasn't completely matured. But treating women as being of secondary status is really not a cultural flaw, even though it can be, and has been, thoroughly shown that men were nurtured to feel superior.

Because what's hard to let go of is that for many the subjugation of women is their barrier against a ruthless world. A scapegoat to blame or at least make sure the chores are done. In a world where, when an advantage can be taken it is without regard for efficacy. 

Can you imagine the whole world put through America's red tape of laws that try to enforce an end to sexist discrimination? Where male bosses commonly walk a fine line of intimidation, or outright harassment, that since it can't be easily proven in a court of law as sexual harassment, bias toward women essentially goes on as before. Ignored.

Yet the world will wake from what for all intents and purposes has been a bad dream. Either with, or after, the prejudiced and selfish and thoroughly corrupt of this world have gone to meet the judgement of their maker. Because there is no religion in this world that can lay claim to what God really thinks, and those who should really be scared are those who are not whole heartedly behind the true emancipation of women that in the end will undoubtedly set the whole world free.

Friday, August 17, 2012

Two Year Sentence For Stunt Honoring Integrity In Church

  The New York Times headlined Russian Punk Band Is Sentenced to 2 Years in Prison for Anti-Putin Stunt, By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN, with Nikolay Khalip, Anna Kordunsky, Ilya Mouzykantskii, Andrew Roth and Anna Tikhomirova contributing.
  Datelined MOSCOW, Moscow judge, Marina Syrova, handed down stiff prison sentences of two years for three young women who staged a protest against Vladimir V. Putin in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior last February. According to The Times, the convicts’ jailing and trial on hooliganism charges have already generated worldwide criticism of constraints on political speech in Russia.
  The explanation continues that while a Pussy Riot guilty verdict against the three women was widely expected, suspense had built over how severe a punishment they would receive. Prosecutors had demanded three-year prison terms, but President Vladimir V. Putin had weighed in on the side of leniency. Commenting on the case briefly, while in London for the Olympics, Mr. Putin said he hoped that the women were not judged “too severely,” but that there was nothing good about what they had done and the decision was the court’s.
  But the judge showed little sympathy, and it was not immediately clear whether the sentences would prompt a reaction on Moscow’s streets, according to The Times. As the judge read the lengthy verdict, hundreds of demonstrators had gathered outside the courthouse and shouted, “Free Pussy Riot!”
  So, is this blow now stricken for the cause of purported conservative justice, or for the rights of those who hold power to benefit?
  Meanwhile riot police arrested dozens, including the former great chess champion Garry Kasparov, who is active in the political opposition. Mr. Kasparov fought with the police and appeared to be beaten as he was bundled into a police vehicle. Poor police mandated to protect their own safety before the public’s or the public will be without their protection. Huh?
  Think if newspaper reporters chimed these facts from inside a cathedral they’d be carted off too? Possibly gaining exclusive jailhouse interviews with The Three Convicts. Although the women disrupted a holy service, didn’t they? Spoke out of turn in God’s House?
  The Times states, near the start of the highly anticipated proceedings, the judge said Pussy Riot’s so-called punk prayer in Moscow’s main cathedral amounted to the crime of hooliganism motivated by religious hatred and repeated that charge today in her verdict. Because that’s the propaganda that has stirred Russia’s religious masses to support this obvious suppression of free speech. The territorial reason behind Jesus going to the cross if anyone cares to recall?
  And because the women acted as a group, the maximum sentence under the law is seven years in prison. Three, not bad, right, supposedly. So it would perhaps be thirty for stealing, and life every time someone is killed? Who’s kidding whom? Not them, they know what they’re doing. That’s why they’re in charge and intend to stay there behind the judge so that if she dared not act on behalf of the team … . So it must be that I’m being fooled? Are we not advancing? Yes Vladimir, what will your legacy be described as once we’re both gone? Traitors can be shot, but eventually no one has to be loyal to anyone alive now. Then where will you and your legacy be, then? Just another Czar?
  Amnesty International condemned the sentences, which a spokeswoman said show “that the Russian authorities will stop at no end to suppress dissent and stifle civil society.”
  The women have been in jail since March and a chorus of supporters, including the music world’s biggest stars have demanded their immediate release. Rallies in support were held in dozens of cities around the world on Friday. Look at that, Vladimir. The martyrdom is already more popular than a well-high-financed police state, except, of course, with The Well-High-Financed Police State.
  The case has become a touchstone in the unfolding political drama that began in Russia after disputed parliamentary elections last December. Partly because of the sympathetic appearance of the defendants, two are mothers of young children, and their group uses music to carry its message. Pitting them against a united Kremlin and Russian Orthodox Church power-structure. Well that should protect all the Icons, God couldn’t seriously give a rat’s a__ about when most holy books point to no idols coming before God.
  While the case has allowed opponents of Mr. Putin to portray his government as squelching free speech and presiding over a rigged judicial system, it has also handed the government an opportunity to portray its political opponents as obscene, disrespectful rabble-rousers, liberal urbanites backed by the West in a conspiracy against the Russian state and the Russian church. Uh huh. From Russia to wherever, put on pretty costumes and control the minds of those you rule and hate them when they disobey, gets us what? Totalitarianism, governments the world over accuse the others of being. Scapegoatism, Stalinism, Putinism? Watch out big guy. Really, you and whoever you appoint historian in charge will not define your legacy. And it’s beginning to look a lot like no one will be as nice as me. Get it? Mate.
  The saga in February began when the women infiltrated Moscow’s main cathedral wearing colorful balaclavas, and pranced around in front of the golden Holy Doors leading to the altar. Dancing, chanting and lip-synching for what would later become a music video of a profane song in which they beseeched the Virgin Mary to rid Russia of Mr. Putin. Oh, so it’s just that they weren’t praying the right way? The Russian Orthodox Church and State can now comfortably represent themselves as those once influential bastards, the Klux Klux Klan did in the U.S. Where if you weren’t one of them, you were just wrong? So is it possible everyone in Russian prison is innocent, while the guilty of conspiracy to control all the sources of wealth roam free?
  At their Church event security guards quickly stripped Pussy Riot of their guitars, but the video was completed with splices of footage from another church.
  But while they have become minor heroes in the entertainment world, Pussy Riot is far more political than musical. Members have never released a song or an album, and they do not seem to have any serious aspirations to do so. But then, Times why should we care, when you point out on Thursday, with tensions rising in anticipation of the verdict and sentencing, the authorities said that threats had been made against Judge Syrova and that bodyguards had been assigned to her. Uh huh.
  As the trial opened, the women, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, 23, Yekaterina Samutsevich, 30, and Maria Alyokhina, 24, apologized, saying they had never intended to offend the Orthodox Church but rather sought to make a political statement against Mr. Putin and against the church patriarch, Kirill I, for supporting Mr. Putin in his campaign for a third term as president. But prosecutors and lawyers for religious people who where described as victims of the stunt said the women were motivated by religious hatred. The defendants were accused of committing “moral harm” and even of practicing Satanism. And at the time I’m sure there were fans in the audience enjoying hearing Nero play while Rome burned too. Or at least wealthy paid enough not to criticize. And what’s the going rate in Russia anyway?
  As the trial continued, the women seemed emboldened by their mounting international support, including from Madonna, who paused a concert in Moscow to give a speech urging their release and later performed wearing a black bra with “Pussy Riot” stenciled in bold letters on her back. Sure, Madonna never saw a publicity stunt she didn’t like, except, perhaps as in this case, your government’s President Putin. But, I know, we both know. Madonna was at least allowed to perform with smoke and mirrors too, I presume. Ha!
  In a closing statement, Ms. Tolokonnikova, the most outspoken of the defendants, railed against repression in Russia. “To my deepest regret, this mock trial is close to the standards of the Stalinist troikas,” she said. “Who is to blame for the performance at the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour and for our being put on trial after the concert? The authoritarian political system is to blame. What Pussy Riot does is oppositional art or politics.” Adding, “In any event, it is a form of civil action in circumstances where basic human rights, civil and political freedoms are suppressed.”
  And now back to this. There was a time once, long ago, when as a small child I was honored to play one of The Three Wisemen before our Church and sing, “We Three Kings.” In preparation before in our Sunday School classroom one of the children raised in the southern white tradition, used my nickname and said, “_____ is the black one.” Well embarrassment aside, a more nobler honor has never since then been bestowed on me than that, and I have a good feeling Pussy Riot’s legacy for their Church performance will prove to be just as correctly virtuous. How about yours Mr. President? Because from here, you still have some catching up to do. Not that you’re so far behind the world leader idiots who claim God tells them to go to war, but against your own people you’re coming too darn close. Cut it out. I know it’s not just you, but you’re the one who’ll be in the books.
June 20 - ? ?, 2019
Two Year Sentence For Stunt Honoring Integrity In Church
8/17/2012 concluded: Well embarrassment aside, a more nobler honor has never since then been bestowed on me than that, and I have a good feeling Pussy Riot’s legacy for their Church performance will prove to be just as correctly virtuous. How about yours Mr. President? Because from here, you still have some catching up to do. Not that you’re so far behind the world leader idiots who claim God tells them to go to war, but against your own people you’re coming too darn close. Cut it out. I know it’s not just you, but you’re the one who’ll be in the books.
Well. How Should I Say This?
    While I've generally always thought reparations was/is a good idea, I've also never made it an essayic point, so I apologize. But to Senator Mitch McConnell's point that enough progress has been established, necessitating that this generation shouldn't be held responsible for our forbears' faults is placing the issue on infinite hold like the National Debt or something. As if this generation were just a corporation severing ties with previous mistakes. As if, really, it weren't so very long ago when mere incremental progress wasn't even made or even approached, at all. 
  That illogical crime of slavery was happened because business is the business of shortcuts and why any self-absolution isn't enough. Because it was the aftermath suffered through, and criminally and socially enforced, that was even more insane. That's what any generation would be satisfied having a pass for? C'mon. We've not even solved the little stuff, Mr. Voice For a Varnished America preferring being hypnotized into thinking nothing's our fault. Above the machinations of whichever conspiracy held sway in previous times. 
  Denial as demonstrated by that wall our president wants, that would come to mean a vast sculptural representation of the façade that our people aren't responsible for what our governments, enterprises and people have ever done in maintaining instabilities that cause people to run from their homes. Technically they're running from the problem, just as we are. 
  Steadfastly behind no reparations takes advantage of "American citizens" who've been denied the deeper awareness of understanding what bigotry reduced us to and produced. It's not our fault generations took so long? But if not our responsibility, believe it or not, we're still part of the fault. Those cracks that divide a world that really isn't separate at all.   
  Can't face the future without facing the past. Hasn't and won't be done. 

  Prison sucks, right? That people end up there is a demonstrable tragedy. Beats all that there's just never enough time to work out a better way. Or money to afford a better style. Where indifference and violence tilt the atrocity's scales is a blindness to the ramifications of what it means to have people treated so poorly. At fault or not. 
  Of course we all want to kiss justice and hold it dear and have it touch everything around us to keep right. But a baker might say, "that's what you get with too much salt and sugar, both." Yep. Life's spooky. The normal can at any moment vaporize when at wits' end sans solution.
Never Passed This Way Again, Before? Right. Like Every Day Opportunity Eludes Our Vision
    Issues seemingly cross the public brow like shooting stars, and happiness is knowing that, at least, this time you're out of the way. The random out there-ness aspect, the public can't touch but is designed to reflect the progenitor. Sleight of hand political persuasion people are so numb to, even, especially, the screamers feel a part when everyone's just parcels
  How powerful you are in the public eye is hardly near as prestigious as the prominently placed two, pictured here -  
Venture a guess at how much? Or are we all just so flabbergasted by what would otherwise be labelled vainglorious gall, depicting upstanding righteous Americanism. Guess if you're going to hitch to a wagon, bandwagons have longer legs, so to speak.  Mean as we have to be is why we're where we are, as formally explained in wonderfully woven historical masterpieces. All The King's Men. For formal display. 
  The planet's fossil fuel fleet needs to transition now and should have been common sense for decades. A president shrugging and hedging and hawing is not a country's executive but someone watching out for the interests of business shortcuts that have a bad history of not working out quite so well.