News Release Archive | women | Accuracy.Org

40th Anniversary of Title IX: Not Just Sports

Title IX was signed on June 23, 1972 by President Richard Nixon and became law on July 1, 1972.

JOANNE SMITH, jsmith at ggenyc.org
Smith, founder and executive director of Girls for Gender Equity, Smith said today: “I benefited from Title IX’s opening up college athletics as many women and girls did, but that’s a small part of what it did. It opened up many aspects of higher education. Still, there is such a gap between the letter of the law and the application of the law. We believe that if administrators and educators were supported to uniformly implement the spirit of Title IX into the daily culture of the school there would be a reduction in gender-based harassment and violence in schools.” Smith is co-author of Hey, Shorty! A Guide to Combating Sexual Harassment and Violence in Schools and on the Streets. See: “Title IX Turns 40, Flaws and All

MOLLY CARNES, mlcarnes at wisc.edu
Professor in the departments of medicine, psychiatry, and industrial & systems engineering and director of the Center for Women’s Health Research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Carnes wrote a piece titled “What Would Patsy Mink Think?” for the Journal of the American Medical Association. The piece states: “Prior to Title IX, only about 10 percent of U.S. medical students were women. Title IX had a personal impact on my life because I entered medical school in 1974. I recently asked separately several women students if they knew what Title IX was. None did.”

Carnes notes that Title IX is also called the Patsy Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act in recognition of one of Title IX’s leading champions. “The 40th anniversary of the passage of Title IX provides an opportunity to reflect on the progress made toward gender equity in medicine… If we are committed to egalitarian principles and if we believe studies confirming that nothing about being a man or woman confers intrinsic superiority in any position within medicine, how could we explain to Patsy Mink our inability to achieve gender equity in the past 40 years after she worked so hard to make it possible?

“Although the explicit prejudice that many women in my generation experienced has been almost (albeit not entirely) eradicated, we are still left with the impact of societal stereotypes about men and women. Stereotypes portray women as more likely than men to be nurturing, supportive, and sympathetic (‘communal’ behaviors) and men as more likely than women to be decisive, independent, and strong (‘agentic’ or action-oriented behaviors). … The pervasiveness of implicit, stereotype-based bias and the way it infiltrates our decision-making processes even when we disavow prejudice may constitute the biggest impediment to realizing the full potential of Title IX.”

GWENDOLYN MINK, wendymink at gmail.com
Gwendolyn Mink has been professor of policy and politics for 30 years and is the author of several books about policies affecting women’s equality. She also is the daughter of Patsy Mink. She said today: “Title IX was one of the biggest policy victories of the feminist movement. The most obvious barriers to women’s educational opportunities were struck down when the law went into effect and the changes accomplished have been long lived. But even so, Title IX’s champions anticipated that the road to full equality would be slow going and that navigating that road successfully would require never ending vigilance to ensure that implementing regulations are not diluted, that compliance is robust, and that girls and women throughout the educational process know their rights and remedies.

“Going forward, vigilant implementation of Title IX also must reach the culture of educational institutions, must dispel stereotypes that impose roadblocks to women’s incorporation on equal footing and must attend to the gross disparities in money and other resources that make it difficult for many girls and women to pursue opportunities that Title IX assures.”

A documentary about Patsy Mink, “Ahead of the Majority” was produced in 2009:.

Equal Pay Day Today

Tuesday, April 17 is Equal Pay Day, a day to mark the fact that women still only earn 77 percent of each dollar earned annually by men and 82 percent of each dollar earned weekly. Equal Pay Day represents the date in the current year through which women must work to match what men earned in the previous year.

ARIANE HEGEWISCH, via Caroline Dobuzinskis, dobuzinskis at iwpr.org
Hegewisch is a study director at the Institute for Women’s Policy Research and co-wrote the just-released fact sheet “The Gender Wage Gap by Occupation.” which finds: “Women’s median earnings are lower than men’s in nearly all occupations, whether they work in occupations predominantly done by women, occupations predominantly done by men, or occupations with a more even mix of men and women.”

The group’s research “finds that women have lower median earnings than men in all but one of the 20 most common occupations for women, ‘bookkeeping and auditing clerks,’ where women and men have the same median earnings. In one of the twenty most common male occupations, ‘stock clerks and order fillers,’ women out-earned men by 3 percent of median male earnings.

Hegewisch said today: “These gender wage gaps are not about women choosing to work less than men — the analysis is comparing apples to apples, men and women who all work full time — and we see that across these 40 common occupations, men nearly always earn more than women. Discrimination law cases provide us with some insights on the reasons that the wage gap persists: women are less likely to be hired into the most lucrative jobs, and — when they work side by side with men — they may get hired at a lower rate, and receive lower pay increases over the years. Discrimination in who gets hired for the best jobs hits all women but particularly black and Hispanic women.” See the news release “Men Earn More Than Women Within Nearly All the Most Common Occupations.”

Also see the group’s “Pay Equity and Discrimination” resource page, which states: “Women are almost half of the workforce. They are the equal, if not main, breadwinner in four out of ten families. They receive more college and graduate degrees than men. Yet, on average, women continue to earn considerably less than men.”

Obama Contraception Compromise: Barrier to Access, Fostering Unequal Attitudes

STEPHANIE SEGUINO, sseguino at uvm.edu
Seguino is professor of economics at the University of Vermont. She recently wrote “Help or Hindrance? Religion’s Impact on Gender Inequality in Attitudes and Outcomes.”

She said today: “In response to Obama’s compromise, I agree with the president that ‘Women deserve to have this preventative health care.’ It is not clear, however, that employees of Catholic organizations that do not provide contraceptive coverage will have ‘the same access and the same affordability.’ The information and time required to access contraceptive care for such employees may well impose a barrier to access.

“The more important issue in my view is that this enables a greater role for religious organizations to play in public policy and access to resources for women. In so doing, we are undermining progress toward gender equality. My research and that of others shows that religiosity contributes to gender-unequal attitudes. Perhaps more surprising is the research that shows that those gender unequal attitudes influence public policy and women’s well-being. A study I recently published shows that the more religious a country, the greater the degree of gender inequality. Women experience greater inequality, as a result, in access to jobs, in education, in maternal mortality, and in the share of professional and technical jobs. It is not hard to see how reducing women’s access to contraception, as this compromise does, can worsen gender inequality in the U.S. — already higher than in many industrialized countries. Studies show that women’s access to contraception improves their health by reducing pregnancy-related deaths. It also has been linked to a reduction in abortions. It has been found to improve women’s abilities to get more education and to generate income for their families.

“Sexual and reproductive health increases with access to contraception. These are major components of the efforts to promote gender equality.

“That religious organizations can therefore extend their own values on women’s appropriate roles into the public policy world with real, palpable negative effects for women suggests a real conflict. The debate about this should be on those terms. Religious ‘freedom’ for some can contribute to economic deprivation for large numbers of women — particularly those who are poor and those who are young.”

Regarding Obama’s claim that there would not be a barrier to access under his proposal, Seguino added: “By making it harder for women who work for Catholic organizations to access contraceptive insurance (researching to find the name of the insurer, taking the time to make the arrangement), access is constrained. This may seem trivial to some, but for women juggling many household responsibilities and stresses, this is a significant impediment. For young women not knowledgeable about insurance practices, this is even more of a barrier. Moreover, we do not know what the impact will be on the work climate, on social norms about using contraception, and whether women in these workplaces will feel pressured to not avail themselves of insurance for fear of the impact on their job. These are unknowns, but it is safe to say that access is made more difficult than if contraceptive care were part of the insurance package Catholic organizations provide.”

Bishops: “Obsessed with What’s Below the Waist”

COLMAN McCARTHY, cmccarthy at starpower.net
A former Washington Post columnist, McCarthy is founder and director of the Center for Teaching Peace in Washington, D.C., and the author of the book “I’d Rather Teach Peace.” He said today: “On public policy issues, the Catholic hierarchy tends to be obsessed with what’s below the waist, not above. Bishops and archbishops are opposed to federal funding for artificial contraception and abortion. They see abortion as a form of violence. I agree with that, but it’s regrettable that church leaders are selective in what kinds of violence they oppose. They support military violence. Modern popes routinely condemn war, yet none has ever forbidden Catholics to join the military to wage the condemned wars. No pope has ever forbidden Catholics to pay taxes that go to waging the condemned wars. In the U.S., Catholic colleges host ROTC programs. Catholic priests serve as military chaplains. Catholicism is not a pacifist religion, as are the Quakers, Mennonites, Church of the Brethren and Bruderhoffs. Church leaders uphold the ‘Just War’ doctrine. Is there a similar ‘Just Abortion’ doctrine? If even a portion of the massive energy that the leaders were expending on opposing abortion all these recent years had been directed at stopping priests from abusing children, a lot of misery would have been avoided. And tens of millions of dollars saved in payments to the victims.”

FRANCES KISSLING, fkissling at gmail.com
A visiting scholar at the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania, Kissling said today: “In characterizing the Obama administration’s decision to limit the religious exemption from providing health insurance for contraception to those religious entities that have as their primary purpose serving the public good as an attack on religious freedom, the bishops have opened the door to a totally appropriate and critical discussion of how poorly constructed the mechanisms for state determination of a legitimate claim for an exemption from the public health and other public policies are.

“Unfortunately, that conversation is not occurring. Usually sensible columnists like E.J. Dionne simply repeat the bishops’ claim that their religious liberty is being violated and worry that anti-abortion Catholics who supported Obama will feel betrayed. But the question of what counts as a legitimate request for an exemption from law or regulation goes unanswered. To successfully and seriously adjudicate these question, good faith is needed on all sides. In this case both the bishops and the universities and hospitals requesting the exemption are acting in bad faith. There is nothing in Catholic teaching that forbids insuring for contraception. In fact, many bishops have explicitly told Catholics in their dioceses that the use of contraception is a matter of personal conscience. Moreover, a number of Catholic colleges and hospitals voluntarily provide insurance coverage for contraception. The claim that they would have to close is false. Thus, it is these institutions that have created a crisis in church/state relations, by asking for an exemption they do not need and insisting that whatever they ask for or claim is needed by the religion be granted without review or evaluation. In abusing the claim of religious freedom, they force the state — the Obama administration — to do precisely what it does not wish to do — get involved in what is a genuine religious teaching. Obama chose a wise middle course: do not second guess the church itself; but in institutions that serve the public good — health, education and welfare — require adherence to mandates in the public interest.

“If, in the face of the misuse of conscientious objection, we were to grant religions an absolute and unexamined right to bow out of public policies others must follow, which is what they want, what will be next? Will they refuse to provide insurance for pregnancy and child birth costs for unmarried or divorced and remarried women or for condoms to prevent AIDS (which they often do)? No right is absolute. A request to be exempt from public policy is rightfully subject to state review — whether it is conscientious objection to participating in war or not meeting the insurance needs of women.” Kissling is past president of Catholics for Choice.

Note: At the end of a Democracy Now interview yesterday, Michael Dougherty of the American Conservative, when debating a representative of Catholics for Choice, stated: “And most of the people who want to enforce this rule would prefer a single-payer system of healthcare anyway, where you’re not actually forcing employers to violate their conscience in buying this.” When asked: “So you’re saying a single-payer system would solve the problem.” Dougherty responded: “Well, I’m saying it would solve this particular problem of conscience, as it has in Europe. The bishops don’t — they do not like that the government subsidizes abortion or contraception, but they are not in full mode of fury, because they are not being asked to formally cooperate with things they view as sinful. And the Church will not cooperate with this and will resort to civil disobedience to avoid it.”

The Guardian in “Rick Santorum thinks pregnancy through rape is God’s gift? Seriously?” notes that Santorum stated about a pregnancy caused by rape: “I believe and I think that the right approach is to accept this horribly created, in the sense of rape, but nevertheless, in a very broken way, a gift of human life, and accept what God is giving to you.”

Military Sexual Assault Against Female Soldiers: Class Action Lawsuit Filed

AP is reporting today that a group of “17 current and former soldiers filed a federal class action lawsuit accusing the Pentagon” of failing to respond to a pattern of sexual abuse and harassment.

HELEN BENEDICT
Author of The Lonely Soldier: The Private War of Women Serving in Iraq, Benedict said today: “I’ve interviewed over 40 women who served in Iraq, many of whom told me stories of sexual harassment and rape at the hands of their so-called brothers-in-arms. These women’s stories inspired lawyer Susan Burke to put together the class action against the Pentagon being reported today, which in turn has encouraged dozens of other women to speak out. The women I talked to came from all areas of the country, were of different ranks and ages, and different ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds. Most were assaulted by their superior officers, men who had control over when they slept, ate, walked, sat, where they worked and what jobs they did. Often, when they tried to report their assaults, the command ignored them or threatened them with punishments to keep them quiet. Even the DoD admits that, for these reasons, 80 to 90 percent of assaults are never reported at all.

“Some stories: [Read more...]

Obama’s Budget and Women

GWENDOLYN MINK
Available for a limited number of interviews, Mink is co-editor of the two-volume “Poverty in the United States: An Encyclopedia of History, Politics and Policy” and author of “Welfare’s End.” She just wrote the piece “Obama Sends Mom’s Beloved Program to the Gallows,” which states: “Among the many social programs the Obama FY 2012 Budget targets for elimination is the Women’s Educational Equity Act. This program historically has been underfunded — and some years it has received no funding at all. But it has remained on the books and as such has expressed the federal government’s commitment to promoting gender equity in education. In his 2012 budget, the president puts this program in the termination column. This cut stings –  the savings it earns is a paltry $2 million, so it feels more like a slap in women’s faces than a tough decision in favor of deficit reduction.

“The fate Obama has assigned Women’s Educational Equity also stings because my mother, the late Congresswoman Patsy Mink (D-Hawaii), was the original sponsor of WEEA in 1974 and fought for it throughout her years in Congress. …What my mother loved about WEEA was that it put government in a positive role, nurturing and supporting efforts at all levels of education to improve the educational context for women and girls. … Title IX requires educational institutions to avoid and remedy discrimination. WEEA gives educational innovators tools to eliminate cultural and ideological barriers (such as sex stereotyping in classroom materials and curricula) to the full participation of girls and women in educational processes while also encouraging programs that advance the incorporation of girls and women into fields that historically have excluded them — math, science, and engineering, for example.

“White House documents that accompany the 2012 Budget state that WEEA objectives will be advanced in other programs. I hope that’s true. But in my cursory reading of the itemized Department of Education budget, the word ‘women’ appears only once — with reference to terminating WEEA. [Read more...]