For the last few months, I've given a lot of thoughts to NOW's current administration and its close association with 2nd-wave feminists like New York's National Organization for Women's president Marcia Pappas and Los Angeles' NOW president Shelly Mandell, and how such associations does not move our movement forward, but rather, backward.
For the record, Pappas is the woman who blasted Ted Kennedy when he decided to endorse Obama over Clinton, claiming that he betrayed women. Mandell is the woman who endorsed Palin because she is a woman.
Along with charges of racism and the inability to adapt with change, NOW has become somewhat of a joke since last year. I've seriously considered no longer supporting it, in membership and attending conventions, but my ties to its local chapter is too strong for me to cut all ties.
But NOW helped me decide quite easily yesterday, when it blasted David Letterman for his affairs, citing that his actions create a hostile work environment for women, because men in power are sexually harrassing them.
I get it. I understand that men in positions of power can and sometimes do use their power to force women into sex, or lose their jobs. I get that sometimes, the work environment is hostile for women. It's a serious subject and one we need to take on.
But NOW, without having heard from any of the women with whom Letterman had sex, using this opportunity to address the issue is classless, and most importantly, shows it doesn't truly care about the individual experiences of women, but rather, will readily write them off to achieve an end goal.
In this instance, NOW attempts to speak for all women, represent all women, without them asking NOW to do so. In this instance, it is NOW making victims out of women who otherwise are empowered women who just so happened to have had sex with Letterman.
It seems NOW does not thinnk women can make decision on their own as to with whom to have sex, nor does it trust women enough to think that they can have sex without having been coerced into it.
The thing that bothers me most about this is it seems like NOW doesn't care about the personal experiences of these women, or what truly happened with them, and without their consent, is using them to further a cause. To be sure, it's an issue we need to talk about, but the end does not justify the means. We don't have the rights to ignore or embelish the personal experiences of women for our own cause, even if it's a good one.
Time and again, it seems NOW is stuck in the past - unable to change and get past the fights it so honorably fought for in the early days of its existence. It seems to comprise of privileged women who claim to speak for all women, without actually checking in with women to understand their lived experiences or needs.
Perhaps critics are right - perhaps NOW has become irrelevant to modern feminism, and no longer serves a purpose. Perhaps some critics are also right in that NOW cannot simply see beyond gender, and as a result, is no longer capable serving the multitudes of women with multitudes of experiences.
In either case, I am still mulling over how I can go on to support women politically and personally without NOW. It's time, I think, we create a new political organization aimed at helping women, because as I see it, of the current, NOW is not the answer.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: NOW wrongly blasts Letterman.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16476
NOW's response to Letterman is the same as the organization's response has always been. It has not changed since the organization's inception. The group's views have always been severely skewed and one-sided. Perhaps it is simply that NOW has become irrelevant and as a result the skewed nature of the organization is becoming more apparent to other feminists, although the reasons for that remain unclear.
Don't make the mistake that just because some of us, as feminists, is calling out NOW that all the sudden, we're now buddy-buddy with you.
We're not. You're set out to criticize all feminism. We're out to criticize mistakes that feminists make. There is a difference.
Get this through your thick skull - we are never going to be allied organizations with you MRA's. So, get over it. You just got rejected.
I am under no illusion that feminists will support efforts to address and prevent sexual and physical violence against boys and men, nor do I assume that feminists will ally themselves with organizations like Male Survivor, 1in6, SNAP, DAHMW, Just Detention or the Innocence Project.
I was simply noting that one's surprise at NOW's response is unwarranted given that the organization has always issued such comments. One's reaction would be akin to being taken aback by the Catholic Church's position on gay marriage, despite that the Church has always had hostile positions on gay issues.
You are obviously oblivious to the National Organization for Men Against Sexism and other feminist-centered organizations that actually work at dismantling gender roles for both women and men, and boys and girls. You know, sort of like Human Rights Campaign?
If you want progress, start working with us, rather than whining about how boys and men aren't taken care of. Besides, what makes you think that my life is any less meaningful, or I care any less about the lives and well-being of young boys, just because I am a feminist.
Quit your whining and spewing hatred of women, and start mentoring young boys in growing up into non-sexist, non-violent men who treat everyone with respect. Perhaps then we'll take you seriously.
You do realize that we care about fathers' rights, and acknowlege that fathers have just as much a responsibility and rights to raise children as mothers, right?
Ignorance is an amazing thing.
I love this article. You put to word some things that had been bothering me, and I was having a hard time verbalizing. Thank you so much for posting, you raised some fantastic points.