It’s time for true women’s liberation
This week at the G8 conference in Canada, Prime Minister Stephen Harper committed his nation to leading the way in the cause of helping women and children in developing nations.
“Together we are committed to moving the world toward the day when women in developing countries will not die or suffer disabilities from pregnancy or childbirth,” Harper said.
He went on to commit roughly $1.8 billion to help with maternity-related health programs around the world, hoping other nations would match suit.
Mr. Harper’s initiative is welcome, but his read on the problem — and the solution — is only half correct.
It’s true that women and children are at the center of the greatest moral crisis of the modern era. But the answer isn’t to protect motherhood, or the narrow concerns involving pre- and post-natal care.
The real answer is to begin the long, hard road to equality for the world’s women, billions of whom still live in abject servitude, with little control over the key decisions that shape their welfare.
Who they will marry, when they will bear children, where they will work, what religion they will practice — all decided by fathers, brothers, and even their sons.
In 1972, John Lennon diagnosed the problem accurately enough, singing that “woman is the n—- of the world.”
His analogy of the condition of women to black slavery was frightening to people.
Many of us, in developed and undeveloped nations alike, have internalized the idea that women are second-class humans.
Across the political spectrum, we find ourselves making apologies for religions, cultures and political structures that limit freedoms for women, without their consent or input.
We accept Orwellian language that justifies a brutal system of economic, social, political and sexual servitude.
Many on the right talk about religious freedom, while many on the left talk about cultural sensitivity.
But the proof is in the pudding. The countries where the treatment of women is most Medieval are also the poorest. Men and women alike in those societies suffer the highest rates of malnutrition, disease, lack of education and war.
Sadly, there are signs that things are getting worse, not better.
In recent decades, the rates of human-trafficking — women forced into domestic- and sexual-slavery — have been on the rise.
And with the steady diaspora of families from Islamic countries, many of the most morally unacceptable abuses of women are taking root once again in Western nations, where women’s freedoms are established in law.
The enslavement of women on religious principles isn’t limited to Islam. Roman Catholics, Mormons, Buddhists, Hindus, they all find common cause in their relegation of women to second-class status.
Nor is religion the only — or even the primary — cause of women’s subjugation.
Still, the question of how to integrate Muslim immigrants into our society, where the equality of women is sacrosanct, is one of the challenges of our time.
There are no cure-alls to this age-old evil.
But the steady empowerment of women strikes me as the surest path to ending many of the problems that now seem intractable.
If you want young mothers and their children to fare better — as Mr. Harper clearly does — the answer isn’t better Western-funded hospitals.
The answer is to make sure that that young women have enough freedom and independence and education to make smart choices, for herself and her family.
Clearly, there’s a long road ahead.
The fight to end slavery began in Britain in the late 1600s. Britain didn’t formally end the trading of slaves until 1807. And it wasn’t until 1865 that the United States ratified the Emancipation Proclamation.
But in many societies, women have shown that there are shortcuts to liberation and empowerment.
Women in the United States didn’t win the right to vote until 1920. They have now risen to the heights of power in our society, leading in board rooms and on battlefields.
“Earlier this year, women became the majority of the workforce for the first time in U.S. history,” wrote Hanna Rosin, in the latest issue of Atlantic Magazine.
“Most managers are now women too. And for every two men who get a college degree this year, three women will do the same.”
As a consequence of this second great American Revolution, our society is stronger, fairer, more prosperous, and (yes) more moral.
In this, our nation is still a model worthy of emulation.
It’s no accident that the Statue of Liberty portrays a woman holding a beacon of hope and change to the world.
That statue, officially called Liberty Enlightening the World, also shows that fearless and powerful woman stepping on a set of broken chains.
Brian:
You write as if your view of what a woman should be transcends all religions, cultures, and all other norms.
Whatever.
What if muslim women don’t want to fit into your mold of an emancipated women.
What if nearly half of American women don’t either.
Women are already biologically burdened with childbearing. Shouldn’t society take that into effect before we “liberate” them into having to grab a weapon and defend their country as well.
Your view of equality may only meet a small percentage of the world population’s idea of equality.
I’ll bet you meet with about 98% of the readers of this blog, who are in the same part of spectrum as you, but you all don’t represent the whole earth.
On June 25, 2010, a Gallup poll shows that only 20% of the United States of America identify themselves as “liberal”.
42% identify themselves as “conservative”. 2-1 conservative to liberal it seems.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/141032/2010-Conservatives-Outnumber-Moderates-Liberals.aspx
One could argue that true women’s liberation begins when women stop dying in childbirth, from unsafe, illegal abortions, or because they have no choice but to bear so many children their minds and bodies simply wear out. We have known since the 1960s that the fewer children women have, the more prosperous their families are and by extension, their communities. We know that children who are wanted are more secure and are less likely to be abandoned or abused by their parents. This makes for healthier, happier families. This is why our government funds international family planning. Unfortunately, these efforts have been stymied during the Reagan and Bush administration. But, I digress.
In this country women’s emancipation from slavery to biology began in the early 20th century. In the US, Canada, and Europe, feminists not only won the vote, they also looked at their lives and the lives of women in general and were appalled by the conditions they found. In the US, Margaret Sanger became enraged over the senseless death of own her mother and so many other working class women in her home near Buffalo, NY. She then made it her life’s work to ensure that women could choose the number of children they would bear and rear. Feminists worked for years to overturn a myriad of laws prohibiting the use and sale of birth control. The birth control pill was invented, because of Ms Sanger efforts to fund primary research on the female endocrine system in the 1940’s and 50’s. GD Searle brought the first birth control pill to market in 1960, fifty years ago, because of this research.
The idea that women have the right and the responsibility to control their own bodies was and still is revolutionary, even to some in this country. In third world countries, women still die every day in childbirth, from illegal, unsafe abortions, from clitoridectomies, from bearing too many children.
Access to safe, effective, affordable birth control and safe conditions in which to give birth are the beginning of women’s liberation. In the 1960’s and 70’s feminists fought the medical establishment to radically change childbirth in this country. Before this time, women were drugged, strapped down on their backs, told formula feeding was best, etc. It was, in short, the dark ages. Women had to stand up and say, no, I want to be awake, aware, and allow my body to birth my baby with the help of technology and medical intervention only when truly needed. Women in the third word deserve no less. So, I say, thank you Mr Harper!
Once women are able to control childbearing they soon realize they and their children can live fuller lives. Everybody wins. Reproductive freedom is is the baseline, if you will of women’s liberation.
Two fact check items:
The Emancipation Proclamation was signed in 1863.
The phrase “woman is the n—– of the world” was coined by Yoko Ono. John borrowed it.
JDM – I think humans should be free. It’s one of the fundamental, sacred principles of our democracy.
Women who choose to live at home or live essentially domestic lives are exercising freedom.
(The same goes for the increasing number of men who fill this role.)
But in much of the world, women don’t have the freedom to choose, or the educational opportunity to explore their potential or sense of self.
This isn’t a liberal-conservative thing. Conservatives claim to be all about personal freedom and the liberating of personal initiative.
I’m saying women should be free to avail themselves of that same right.
–Brian, NCPR
jdm writes
You write as if your view of what a woman should be transcends all religions, cultures, and all other norms.
as was perfectly clear from brian’s original post, and made doubly clear in his comment, brian’s assertion is that women should have the same freedom to live their lives as men have.
as a conservative, jdm, do you have something else in mind?
Brian says:
“This isn’t a liberal-conservative thing. Conservatives claim to be all about personal freedom and the liberating of personal initiative.”
It is and it isn’t.
I want women to be free to be able to use a cell phone in a car. You may not.
You would probably argue for a woman to have the freedom to have an abortion. I would not.
Our freedom has been modified by our laws, as in the two examples I just gave, yet we may or not agree on which of them to keep and which to throw out.
Can we at least grant that there other societies, who have, over time, modified their freedoms to suit their culture. Who are we to judge what is the absolute best for them, when we cannot determine for ourselves.
I agree with you that slavery is bad. I don’t agree with you on abortion. You could argue that one is absolute, and one is political, but are they?
Just to clarify, I do think the liberation of women is an absolute moral value.
Just as I think slavery was a “cultural norm” that needed to be set aside, the same goes for the subjugation of women.
Regarding abortion: It’s interesting that you link my argument for the liberation of women with the legalization of abortion?
Do you think that free women will always choose to make abortions legal?
And if so, would you prefer that they be deprived of freedom?
–Brian, NCPR
“The countries where the treatment of women is most Medieval are also the poorest. Men and women alike in those societies suffer the highest rates of malnutrition, disease, lack of education and war.”
This is really the crux of the issue, poverty and education. These get tangled up in other issues of war, health, family planning, religion and on and on. But there seems to be a direct correlation between level of education, level of income and greater degree of freedom for all people.
As for the Statue of Liberty you should remember that she is a French woman.
I do not believe we are the shining beacon to the world in terms of women’s rights and equality for women. I’m guessing that goes to a European nation, maybe Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway or Sweden. Maybe we are toward the front of a torchlight parade.
Numerous third world nations and even several Islamic countries have had women presidents or prime ministers. But we’re doing better all the time.
Brian: I consider abortion to be murder, not a freedom. Therefore, your question to me reads as, “would you prefer that they be deprived of murder”, to which I would answer in the affirmative.
hermit: Men and women should have equal access to freedom.
Liberating women doesn’t equal giving them access to abortion, and there are other actions that can be inserted into that statement.
Some of the liberties you espouse are not universally agreed upon to be liberties. That is my point.
JDM –
It’s fine to argue that in a free society, where everyone has an equal vote and a chance to express their views, we should criminalize abortion.
If you can convince enough of your fellow citizens (male and female) that you are right, then your views will win out.
That’s democracy.
But that process looks very different — it is, bluntly, oppression — in the many societies around the world where women aren’t free to participate in the debate or the decision-making.
–Brian, NCPR
Yes freedom is the key. In our society women have the choice to be Mormon or Catholic or Muslim, as adults they voluntarily participate. No one cares today if you go to Church or not, when you go to mass or church or temple you go because you want to go and when you go do you are saying I agree with what they do here and what they teach I am here as a free person who wants to be part of this. Women can choose to be conservative and pro-life and many do choose that. They can choose to have a whole bunch of children; or they can choose to do none of those things. I think this is a very positive thing here and I wish that it were true around the globe. Freedom is a universal yearning that all humans share and women must be free to make those true choices to exercise their free will.
Now I think the catch is when do we know that is not happening? How can we tell when something really is the subjugation of women or is it really something we just don’t like? Do Muslim women in France who are not allowed to practice their faith by dressing as their faith dictates appreciate that? Maybe they do maybe they are forced to practice their faith by their husbands, but maybe not? Do Palestinian women in Gaza; who have on average one of the highest birth rates in the world feel that they are being oppressed into doing that by Islam and their husbands and fathers or are we just uncomfortable with someone having that many children and thus assert our western values saying that those women must have been forced to have so many children?
This is not as black and white as it seems.
The funny thing about secular and religious law is how it is whatever it says it is. Basically, might makes right.
True law, God’s law if you will, can never be violated or broken.
On the subject of women, I would hope we could reach the day when all people could be seen as human first and man or woman second. One set of standards for men and another set for women is an attempt to violate human rights.
Of course men and women are physically different. So too are short people and tall people. But should there be one set of rules for short people and another set of rules for tall people?
I really don’t care what this or that religion or culture thinks women should or shouldn’t be, how they should dress or what they should do in any way different from men. All we have here is people being control freaks. But isn’t that what governments and religions (for the most part run by men) do?
Guys, why are you so afraid of women?
But I think it comes down to freedom and freedom means freedom of faith. By denigrating people of faith by calling them control freaks what does that say about the women who freely choose to be part of these traditions? What are you saying about Mormon women who choose to be Mormons for example or adult Muslim women who choose to wear a veil in the US or France for example? Are they like children and need to be guided to make the “right” choices?
We have to be careful in this area not to simply impose our own personal ideas about what is “good” for women because we happen to have an ax to grind with a particular faith or tradition. Women in this country in large part have the freedom to choose how they will live and I think we can agree that should be true around the globe. The choices those women make may not be what we think is correct.
jdm,
i think you’ve already effectively said that you agree with this, but i just want to reiterate that the point all along has been that men and women should enjoy equal freedom, not that women (or anyone else) should have ultimate freedom to do whatever they want. (for example, we’re not free to impinge on other people’s rights.)
so of course what brian has written is not an argument for allowing abortion, at least insofar as there’s still all the room in the world for society to debate how to balance women’s rights vs. fetal rights.
finally, when you write
Liberating women doesn’t equal giving them access to abortion, and there are other actions that can be inserted into that statement
just what else do you have in mind?
Marvel,
Yes, everyone can believe whatever they want to believe. Not only can they, they do.
Belief is what people do when they don’t know. We all do it. It’s called filling in the blanks.
So I am not saying people of any religion shouldn’t be allowed to believe whatever they believe in.
The problem we seem to have between the Western world and the world of Islam is more about Muslims wanting us to be tolerant of them while they maintain the right to be intolerant of us.
If a woman from this country goes into a Muslim country, they expect her to dress according to their standards. Then when they come here, well you know the deal.
Fair is fair.
On the abortion front, I don’t believe a human being exists until the fetus is out of the womb and breathing air. That’s my belief. Do I have the right to believe what I believe?
Yes Pete you do and although I disagree with your view on abortion I understand it and you have the right to hold that view certainly. My point was just that we be very careful when we promote the freedom of all human beings in particular women that we understand that with that freedom they may very well choose something we don’t agree with.
The issue is the freedom of women and in the world today as Brian pointed out there are whole swaths of the world where girls have no choice in the most important things that impact them.
Abortion being legalized and available does not mean the rights of women are secured we can look no farther than China or India to see that. In those places abortion is legal and men are still in control thus we see them forcing women to abort usually they are forced to abort little girls. Which certainly does not say very much for legal abortion helping women and girls.