BS: Council for Women

Subject: RE: BS: Council for Women
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 06:11 PM

Jeri...I thought about that a long time. Maybe 'deferring' was too strong a word, but it was WAY more than just being polite. The boss (the GS-12) spoke to the other women more ummm... 'forcefully'... than she did to me. To be fair, of the 7 in the office, only 3 really assigned me tasks, but the overall feeling was one I had never seen before. Of course, I never asked anyone there about it. I really doubt that THEY would have admitted to acting that way.

Interestingly, in the last 2-3 weeks I was there, they hired a younger woman who was a real advocate for women's rights and talked about 'issues'...and they seemed a bit uncomfortable with her doing so....just a 'oh, I don't go to those events' sort of reply when she said anything.

I don't claim this sort of thing was common, but I was pretty sure
of what I saw at the time.

I have worked in other places where the attitude was way at the other end of the scale, and I had to watch what I said...

Subject: RE: BS: Council for Women
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 01:13 PM

Bill, it's a matter of communication. I don't think those women in your office were deferring, they were just being polite. Asking if you have the time to do something they wanted done might have been answered, "I have do decide whether to do this new job or finish this other one I'm working on for you."

I used to do that, but I had no problem with saying "This is a priority issue and I need you to do it NOW."

Subject: RE: BS: Council for Women
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 12:52 PM

As a male, I have seen the need for improvement many times. Once, I had a temporary job (1050 hour intern)in Washington DC, in the early days of EPA. I was sent to the office of the asst. Administrator, where I worked in the area that dealt with HIS mail, and with articles that he needed to approve for inclusion in the Federal Register. I ran errands and sorted & filed...until they decided I could actually proofread...then I read some of those documents.
So? Well, the office was all women...and they deferred to me!
"Bill...do you think you might have time to check these over?"
"Bill, if you get a minute, could you file these items?"
It was not just politeness...they acted as if it was up to me to accept the tasks.
I was a temporary, low-life INTERN! I was a GS-5! The woman who ran the office was a GS-12! But...I was male, and all day they dealt with men who gave orders. We got along fine, but I felt vaguely awkward for 4 months.


I'm sure it's probably better now, but I hope the new Council is able to approach ALL aspects of the issue - including the mindset of women who never learned that there another way.

Subject: RE: BS: Council for Women
From: katlaughing
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 12:04 PM

Thanks, Jeri, great article. Alice, I remember those days, too. In fact, too many women are still paid less than their male counterparts.

Subject: RE: BS: Council for Women
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 11:04 AM

Alice,

And I have been in a company that declared that no white males were allowed to be hired or given pay raises, but women and minorities could be. And the pay scales for the jobs were the same ( engineering).

Did you read the article?

Subject: RE: BS: Council for Women
From: Alice
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 10:35 AM

Being a man, you've never been paid less or not hired for a job you are qualified for just because of being a woman. I've experienced that. I still remember the job bulletin board at the university financial aid office where there was a line down the center. On the left at the top, it said "Girls" on the right side at the top it said "Men". The index cards thumb tacked to the left side were minimum wage. The better paying jobs were on index cards thumb tacked to the side that said "Men".

Subject: RE: BS: Council for Women
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 08:04 AM

As a woman, I guess I'm allowed to have an opinion. Here's another article.

Women's Rights Are Human Rights
Huffington Post
JoAnn Kamuf
Posted March 17, 2009 | 06:35 PM

President Obama continues to recognize the vital contributions that women make to the U.S. economy. Last week's Executive Order creating the White House Council on Women and Girls, and the passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in January, demonstrate the President's commitment to making women's rights a domestic policy priority. The Council includes almost every Cabinet official and will work across departments and agencies to ensure that women and girls are at the fore of policy considerations. Creating this Council in the midst of our economic recovery recognizes that women serve as vital economic participants for American families and communities.

There is no better time, on the heels of this vital domestic legislation and the celebration of International Women's Day, to express this commitment to women's rights to the international community. The President should take this opportunity to submit the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women ("CEDAW") to the Senate for ratification. Ratification of CEDAW would confirm the President's commitment to improving the status of women both in domestic and international policy arenas.

CEDAW ratification would powerfully demonstrate President Obama's commitment to stand up for women's human rights, by example at home and by encouraging others abroad. The treaty would strengthen U.S. laws that promote women's equality. It would lead to further economic empowerment of women, improve equality in the workplace, and bolster laws that prohibit discriminatory impact. U.S. law currently prohibits unequal pay for unequal work, however, existing laws do not go far enough to ensure equal treatment and equal pay. While the recent Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act provides women some protection, the law principally deals with women's ability to seek redress for discriminatory pay and expands the time frame for women to challenge such discrimination. CEDAW would build on this by enhancing the underlying standards concerning equal pay and paid parental leave (for men and women), in ways that would help support American families. Ratification of this major human right treaty would recognize the significant role that women play in strengthening the United States, economically, socially and politically. Moreover, it would place the United States at the women's rights table internationally, to more effectively promote women's human rights globally through our foreign policy.

Another critical step that the President can take to demonstrate his commitment to both women's rights and human rights in general, would be to issue an executive order to reconstitute and revitalize the Interagency Working Group on Human Rights.

This Working Group, established in 1998 by President Bill Clinton but essentially dismantled by President George W. Bush, would serve as a coordinating body among federal agencies and departments for the promotion and respect of human rights and the implementation of human rights obligations in U.S. domestic policy. This would better enable the federal government to promote its human rights commitments concerning torture, fairness in the justice system, rule of law, and securing equality in health care, education, housing, employment, and the criminal justice system.

In his inaugural address, President Obama spoke of America's history of leading "not just with missiles and tanks" but by "the force of our example." After eight years of policies that eroded human rights and marred the image of America in the world, the nation is ready to turn the page, embrace change, and lead by example once again. Capitalizing on this national sentiment, the President can build on his initial executive orders on Guantanamo, torture, and women's rights, by carving out a legacy that secures human rights both at home and abroad, through reactivating the Interagency Working Group and signaling his support for the ratification of CEDAW.

Subject: BS: Council for Women
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Mar 09 - 07:03 AM

I am, by being male, not allowed to have an opinion on this. But I invite others to let me know what they think:





Bring the Boys Along
The White House Council Obama Forgot

By Kathleen Parker
Wednesday, March 18, 2009; Page A13

With a flick of his pen, President Obama finally laid to rest Freud's most famous question and iterated one of man's hardest-learned lessons: Women want what women want.

And the wise man sayeth: "Yes, dear."

Thus it came to pass that the president created the White House Council on Women and Girls to ensure that all Cabinet-level agencies consider how their policies affect women and families. Presumably, men and boys may expect to benefit from what is helpful to women and girls. We shall see.

There's little profit in criticizing a move to make life better for the fairer sex. Still, one does have to suppress a chortle as we pretend that the First Father's rescue of damsels in distress is not an act of paternalistic magnanimity. Chivalrous, even.

Oh, well, irony is hardly a stranger to gender. Neither are exaggeration and myth. If I may . . .

........

As a father of two girls, Obama wants to do the right thing by women. A noble purpose. But if he wants America's girls to find proper mates, he might create a White House Council for Boys and, perhaps, Fathers.


It's the right thing to do for a nation that aspires to equality. Just say yes, dear."




http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/17/AR2009031702941.html