Day Without A Woman, March 8, 2017

Photos in this post are mine taken at CCB Plaza, Durham, North Carolina.

A Women’s Strike Reader

https://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/international-womens-strike-reader-working-class-socialist-feminism

**********

There is a lot to process in thinking about the day, it's effectiveness and how different segments of the population reacted to it. 

At first blush, I thought well, isn't that what the men want? Then they can joke, have their locker room talk and not have to bother with equality. Maybe they'll decide they like it better that way and won't help right the system. On the other hand, when some teachers announced their intent to observe the day, even in our "right to work" state, a few school systems chose to close for the day. Some people recognized the impact and prepared for it. And if mothers who take kids to school, cook, clean, buy groceries, do laundry, whether or not they also have full time jobs outside the home were able to pull off striking completely in all work at least men might notice and even be compelled to switch up or divide labor differently than before the strike. This second example wasn't as widespread it seems, I even failed on several counts. Was it a failure then?

I considered striking as a privilege, though the history of strikes would negate that, some still maintain that. I did consider that those women who can strike might make more work for those who can't, though this might happen in other strikes, that you hurt the group you try and help.

This might help muddle through this point:
https://www.thenation.com/article/when-did-solidarity-with-working-women-become-a-privilege/

And what about this ability to strike? Is it that some of us are actually unable- or is it unique to women, unique to this strike - that we've been conditioned to not be disagreeable, to be too polite even when it means hurting ourselves hence we don't feel confident we can all walk out like in a predominantly male profession.

And there was this perspective. . . 

What to make of it- I don't think it's about the percent who participated in one particular way or evaluating your own self worth, as some have insinuated. It's a call to action to some, an education to others, or maybe a renewal of the commitment to anti-capitalism and the forces that perpetuate the patriarchy.

On Radio Dispatch coverage of the Women's Strike, there were two great articles detailing the history of the strike and movement:

Here are the two podcast episodes:
Analyzing Women’s Strike Coverage  March 10, 2017

https://btrmedia.s3.amazonaws.com/DJRadioDispatch031017.mp3

Women On Strike  March 9, 2017
http://www.theradiodispatch.com/2017/03/show-notes-for-todays-episode-3917/

And the two articles:
https://newrepublic.com/article/141160/strike

https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/from-the-archive-blog/2012/mar/08/clara-zetkin-international-womens-day

Among the good points in these two episodes:

• Breaking down a NYT piece about the "failure" of the strike
• Feminism for the 99% what it means
• Clara Zetkin, the movement's roots in socialism and the origin of the strike
• Dangers of lean in feminism- it can't be solely about arguing for higher pay, that marginalizes others, the pay gap is still an issue but leaves out a large portion, such as the trans women killed in February
• Be explicit in our politics (see Bryce Covert's piece, New Republic)-  woman president, women CEO, like Sandberg at Facebook is not victory for ALL women, it's a victory for some- read wealthy white women
• Name capitalism as the enemy, it'll reinforce misogyny, patriarchy-- think Clara Zetkin, reordering society 

Anyway, do yourself a favor and listen!

**********

 Trust women, get it??

**********

And some more examples of why we need feminism:

Ok, so this below is why I have gotten angry in some of my Twitler voter posts. Yes, I believe I can be friends with Cheeto's fans and yes I know we can differ on budget or health care plans and not be outrageously offended, BUT when it comes to racism and sexism or denying someone rights because they don't agree with your religious views, this should be UNACCEPTABLE. It should be unacceptable NOT because you have a black friend, a daughter or a wife, it is unacceptable because another human being is being treated as LESS. That absolutely should be offensive to you and outrage is justified. If you are not offended by people being treated as less that human beings on the basis of race or gender or religion, perhaps YOU should re-evaluate YOUR position and stop your complaining about hateful libtards and feminazis.

http://mashable.com/2017/03/07/what-men-secretly-say-about-women/

"The rest of the page's members, it appears, just looked the other way. They probably shrugged their shoulders and said to themselves, "It's just locker room talk." If that defense worked for the president of the United States, it'll probably work for a bunch of patriotic Marines."

#persisterhood
#notgoingback
#womensrightsarehumanrights
#blacklivesmatter
#respectexistenceorexpectresistance
#freedomofreligion
#freedomfromreligion

**********

a sexism experiment
http://www.attn.com/stories/15518/creative-sexism-experiment-female-co-worker?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=direct-share&utm_campaign=shares

**********

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/kathycaprino/2016/06/12/why-men-and-women-are-held-to-dramatically-different-standards-and-women-are-punished/amp/


Discusses the disparity, but breaks down a bit on the solution. I think we need more than just to clean up our own house. Maybe it should start there, I can see that- how can you help anyone else if you can't stand up for yourself. But I don't know if that's the only thing holding us back.

**********

Does Hillary Clinton face a different standard for honesty?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/29/does-hillary-clinton-face-a-different-standard-for-honesty/?utm_term=.6c34af13cf9b


**********

Women Held To Higher Ethical Standard Than Men, Study Shows

http://www.npr.org/2016/06/02/480487259/women-held-to-higher-ethical-standard-than-men-study-shows

Universal/Single Payer/Socialized Medicine vs our current mess of so-called "choices"

I wasn't really planning to write all this, but I saw something, looked some things up to find out more, and here we are.

I don’t know that universal or national health care is THE answer to all of our problems, but I would like us to have more discussion of actual pros and cons. I am sick of the invoking of the Red Scare (Sound familiar? Great tax debate of 2008, anyone?) and that being sufficient for everyone to run for cover and bury it for 30 or 40 years, no questions asked.

Universal health care does sound pretty good, though, and I think I’m leaning toward it so far. It seems better than what we've got. I know the links are going to make me sound like a huge proponent, but I'm just trying to sort it out and compare it to all the negatives I hear.

+++

AMA Opposition to Obama Public Health Plan Echoes Group’s Decades-Long Resistance to Healthcare Reform (demonization of universal health care)

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/6/12/ama_opposition_to_obama_public_health

AMY GOODMAN: Yes, that, the voice of actor Ronald Reagan, employed by the American Medical Association in their campaign entitled “Operation Coffee Cup” to stress that the government-sponsored health insurance system would lead to a form of socialism.

+++

Socialized Medicine: Polemic or Panacea?
http://www.lawcrossing.com/article/4077/Socialized-Medicine-Polemic-or-Panacea-/

The movement for universal coverage in the United States goes back to the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt, who first proposed the idea. Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman also attempted to implement socialized medicine as part of their administrations' legislative accomplishments, but it was killed by a public campaign engineered by the American Medical Association which claimed, "Socialized medicine…will undermine the democratic form of government."

+++

A Canadian doctor diagnoses U.S. healthcare
The caricature of 'socialized medicine' is used by corporate interests to confuse Americans and maintain their bottom lines instead of patients' health.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-rachlis3-2009aug03,0,538126.story

What's Canadian Health Care Really Like?
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=111084018

Dr. DAY: I don't think there's a best system. I think that - and Canada and the United States, we have our own personalities, but I think that there are countries that we can look at the best practices from and copy what works in those countries, countries like Switzerland and Germany and Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands, for instance, that are socialized democracies, that have an element of government care, but they're hybrid systems. They take bits of what Canada and the United States have. They do it more cheaply, more effectively and more efficiently and at a much lower cost than the United States.

Debunking Canadian health care myths
http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/ci_12523427


+++

Physicians for a National Health Program
http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single_payer_resources.php

Netherlands' Health Care Reflects National Values
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92641635

Series- Germany: Health Care for All
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91971170

Breaking news: Under Obama, we won't be free says Palin

"See, under a big government, more tax agenda, what you thought was yours would really start belonging to somebody else, to everybody else. If you thought your income, your property, your inventory, your investments were, were yours, they would really collectively belong to everybody. Obama, Barack Obama has an ideological commitment to higher taxes, and I say this based on his record... Higher taxes, more government, misusing the power to tax leads to government moving into the role of some believing that government then has to take care of us. And government kind of moving into the role as the other half of our family, making decisions for us. Now, they do this in other countries where the people are not free. Let us fight for what is right. John McCain and I, we will put our trust in you."

from:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/25/palin-obamas-tax-plans-co_n_137851.html

This is the latest and farthest stretch for these two yet. Crazy stuff. I can't believe she said that! Maybe she misinterpreted Joe the Plumber's socialism reference? Wow! Your property won't belong to you, it'll belong to everyone?! Under Obama, some might start to think the government is supposed to take care of us and make decisions for us like in countries where people aren't free. Hmmm. Wonder what the implication is, here? I suppose she didn't actually say we wouldn't be free under Obama, but the line is so fine you can barely see it.

Not to mention, they're still using several debunked myths- Obama's plan means higher taxes for the average person, he voted 90+ times for higher taxes. And they jump all over Obama for saying 95% of people will get a tax cut when it is really 80-something percent.

What are they thinking? Since we didn't really succeed in making the terrorist thing stick (despite the ever so inventive rumor about him being Muslim and a radical, etc) maybe with the help of Joe/Sam, the almost plumber from Alaska who happens to be in Ohio, we can paint him as a socialist, communist, or anything along those lines before the week is up.

The article made a good point about the tax code and the 1990's- if that was a communist era, then look out, if not, she's blowin' smoke, golly gee gosh darn it.