February 20, 2004

• On dial-up, and with slow down-load, I've only read the Alice Paul interviews, so far. But she is someone I would have really liked to have known. Rock-ribbed New Englander, Quaker, sure that her work was essential. She felt that the Equal Rights amendment was so important. But, tell me, do we still need an ERA? I've not felt generally discriminate against in a long time. Does anyone else out there disagree?
• "discriminateD"
• It would be a good thing, path, to have it in law. I, thankfully, have never been paid less than a male for doing the same job - but my mother has been. And there are many who would still justify it, especially in manual labour (when frankly women have been doing manual labour for millenia and, as my mother put it - she may have been only able to lift 2/3 as much as once, but she moved twice as fast and took fewer breaks). Frankly, I would like to see a proper ERA to make sure that all are treated equal - including men getting access to parental leave. But an ERA would do little to help the real reasons women still consistently make less than men. Many women are paid less than men not at the same jobs, but because so many female dominated professions (caring for children and the elderly, cleaning, etc) are paid so little. In the intellectual professions, like academia, many women are paid less than men their own age or at the same stage in their career, because they take longer to finish degrees due to childbirth and rearing, and because they are less likely to switch between universities to get higher pay (because that would dislocate their husband). These are all complex things that can't be changed simply in law, but only by reworking the very threads of our society.
• jb - I may have been of, or close to, your mother's generation, but I was lucky enough, toward the last half of my career, to have been equally regarded, and paid. But I will never forget a number of severe insults earlier on, based on my gender. ("I didn't consider you for that job because, well, I guess it's because you're a woman." Or, "Women may be ok in accounting, but they really shouldn't be in business, otherwise." The latter was said by a government official who was auditing our progress on a Navy contract, and who demanded that he get "presents" before he left.) And, I can remember the first time I traveled with a male engineer to negotiate another contract - the gossip was daunting. And then, there were the dirty jokes which my "peers" would bring out if I joined a guy dominated discussion... This was all back in the '70s. Things were so much better,later, that I never felt a male/female difference in my work. I can't tell you how that lowered stress. There may be pockets of discrimination against women out there, but I'm grateful that I escaped them. And, yes, if the are still places I didn't visit where there inequalities, I would support an ERA.
• Don't lean on me man, 'cause I can't afford a ticket.
• Wolof - huh? Is it a modern meme that I didn't notice? On the other hand, you seem so cool that I wouldn't mind leaning on you.
• Oh - and I know I said it before, but terrific links, homunculus. I just wish the profession of history paid more attention to the importance of oral history. (They do pay attention, and a lot is changing, but its just been a text dominated discipline for such a long time.)
• Davey Bowie, "Suffragette City". Ancient, but sort of sticky.
• Sticky indeed! Good one, Wolof.
• Damn you, Wolof, you beat me to it. /Hey man, oh, leave me alone
• On the other hand, you pulled out "fleer", for which fully respec.
• I'll trade your Fleer for my weapons of mass destruction.
• Equal Rites 2004
• I guess we all know where women first got the vote? (I bet tracicle knows.) Second was in my home state.
• 1893, I believe.