RI Women’s Fund opens applications for policy learning program


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The Women’s Fund of Rhode Island has officially begun the application process for its 2015-2016 Women’s Policy Institute.

Graphic courtesy of https://www.facebook.com/womensfundri/photos/a.84051835944.78807.84048970944/10150162360250945/?type=3&theater
Graphic courtesy of https://www.facebook.com/womensfundri/photos/a.84051835944.78807.84048970944/10150162360250945/?type=3&theater

The institute, which began in 2011, works to increase the number of women leaders that are involved in state policy creation. Members will first be trained, and then will work to draft and support legislation concerning women’s issues. It has already been responsible for major policy changes, such as paid family leave and workplace pregnancy accommodations.

The program is open to women 18 or older who work in all sectors, and come from all backgrounds, races, and interests. The Women’s Fund said that “ideal candidates are passionate individuals looking to gain new skills and make a difference in the lives of women and girls.”

Candidates are chosen through a competitive application process. All applications are reviewed and applicants will be invited for in person interviews. After that point, 15 candidates will be chosen and invited to join the Women’s Policy Institute.

Those who are interested in applying can attend an informational session on July 28 at 5:30 pm at the Law Firm of William J. Conley, 123 Dyer Street.

Those interested may apply at www.wfri.org.

Applications are due by August 11, 2015, and can be mailed to the Women’s Fund at One Union Station, Providence, Rhode Island, 02903, or by emailing shanna@wfri.org. Applicants that have been selected for interviews will be notified by August 17, 2015. Sessions for the institute will begin in mid-September, with a monthly two-day retreat on Fridays and Saturdays. The Women’s Policy Institute is free of charge.

ACLU: RI elementary schools promote gender stereotypes


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

acluDespite decades of progress toward gender equality, in Rhode Island today gender-exclusive student events that are specifically held for girls or boys with the active support of elementary schools help to perpetuate blatant gender stereotypes. Almost invariably, the girls’ events, organized by parent-teacher groups and publicized by the schools, are dances, with another gender-stereotyped event, like a pajama party, occasionally taking their place. By contrast, and just as invariably, the events arranged for boys involve almost anything but dancing, are wide-ranging, and focus on purportedly male-friendly activities like sports and arcade games.

That’s the finding of a report issued by the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island, based on a survey of 40 elementary schools in 16 school districts. The report, “Girls Just Wanna Darn Socks,” states that the schools’ promotion of these parent teacher association (PTA) and parent teacher organization (PTO) activities reinforces outdated stereotypes of gender roles in Rhode Island’s youngest residents.

“Rhode Island girls, routinely sent to dances, are fed the same tired stereotype that they must look pretty and be social, while boys are given access to magic and science shows and physical activities – their own and others – like PawSox games and trampoline parks,” the report stated. Through open records requests, the ACLU found that during the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 school years, 80% of  “girls’ events” at the 40 elementary schools studied were dances. The few other events held for girls generally encompassed pajama parties, yoga nights, and blanket sewing. The activities for boys, on the other hand, were much more diverse, and included attendance at baseball and hockey games, science and magic shows, and outings for laser tag, bowling, and arcade games.

Although these extracurricular activities are hosted by PTAs and PTOs, the ACLU’s investigation found that the schools regularly promote these events in various ways, through posting on school websites, use of school listservs, and by otherwise offering the parent-teacher groups special access to school resources to promote the events. The report argues that the use of these school resources to support such stereotypical and discriminatory events undermines Title IX, the landmark anti-discrimination law that has helped break down the barriers between girls’ and boys’ education over the past four decades.

Great progress has been made by women in education in the years since Title IX’s passage, but girls and women continue to be underrepresented in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields. By supporting these gender-exclusive events, the ACLU report argues, “Rhode Island’s schools, however unintentionally, support the sort of stereotyping that helped discourage girls from those fields for so long.”

The report concludes:

In the 21st Century, however, it should be simply unacceptable for public schools to be fostering the notion that girls belong at formal dances, yoga or sewing while boys should be offered baseball games, bowling and science. Not every girl today is interested in growing up to be Cinderella; many enjoy participating in and attending sports events and playing arcade games. Similarly, not every boy makes sports his obsessive pastime or cringes at the thought of going to a dance. Such gender-segregated programming – based on gender stereotypes about the talents, capacities and preferences of children – is harmful to boys and girls alike, and fails in any meaningful way to provide “reasonably comparable” experiences.

The report called on school equal opportunity officers to halt school support of these types of discriminatory extracurricular events, and instead discuss with PTO/PTAs the need to promote gender-inclusive activities. The ACLU also called on the state Department of Education to intervene by providing guidance to school districts on the illegal nature of their promotion of these gender-discriminatory activities. The General Assembly enacted a law in 2013 authorizing gender-exclusive extracurricular activities, but required them to be “reasonably comparable.” The ACLU and numerous women’s rights groups opposed the legislation.

 

Where Goodness Runs Up Against Freedom


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

On Monday I took a walk to the bank to deposit a couple of checks. On my way I watched two men in a pickup truck stare for longer than is decent as a female jogger ran by. That classic no-blink, head following the jogger’s movement kind of stare. I’m pretty sure everyone knows it. It’s a small interaction, but it’s a daily occurrence. It’s also why I have the utmost respect for women who jog, because stares are the least of their worries.

Later that night I ended up checking out LoveGov, which features as part of its mission statement the “right to individual privacy”. When you see that on the Internet, it usually means the ability to protect personal information from view or misuse, and often it means protecting anonymity on the Internet. In a larger context, it usually fits into “Internet freedom”, which organizations like Demand Progress have taken the lead in fighting for. I want to be clear, I don’t think LoveGov or Demand Progress are advocating anything of the sort that follows.

This image of a zombified Reddit alien was used to represent the founder of a number of sexist and racist subreddits.

But, idling about the Internet, I stumbled across this article on Reddit and its user-created censorship of Gawker and the reasons and consequences. To sum that up, a reporter from Gawker was investigating a Reddit moderator (who don’t run the site, and are pretty much given free rein) and decided to publish the Redditor’s real name. The Gawker reporter, Adrian Chen, describes this Redditor as specializing in “”. The current focus of this guy was on a part of Reddit called “CreepShots” which is summed up nicely in this manner “When you are in public, you do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. We kindly ask women to respect our right to admire your bodies and stop complaining.” Essentially, “we’re going to take pictures of women (usually their breasts and bottoms) and post it on the Internet. Good day.”

So you might see why this makes my jaw drop. But then there’s also something here. Someone decided that the creeps needed to be outed. And out them they did, which is leading police to pursue charges against at least one man. In fact, good people, lead by an anonymous woman are doing so, collecting information on those who posted on CreepShots and posting it publicly to a Tumblr called Predditors, as well as sending it to employers and law enforcement. If you scroll through it, you find a bunch of average men. Average men who just happened to take pictures of women without consent and then post those pictures publicly online.

Reddit, in case you’ve forgotten, was a major player in the SOPA/PIPA Internet blackout. In fact, while this was happening, some of its heads were touring the country touting Internet freedom and activism.

Naturally, the creepers are running scared. One of the fundamental rules of Reddit is “don’t post personal information“. Any of them could be next. And in response to this, the outing of people doing frankly disgusting acts, how did much of the Reddit community respond? When word leaked that Mr. Chen would expose the identity of Violenacrez (a well-connected moderator), the Reddit moderator community preemptively banned all Gawker links across various sub-boards on Reddit. Mr. Chen sums it up simply:

Under Reddit logic, outing Violentacrez is worse than anonymously posting creepshots of innocent women, because doing so would undermine Reddit’s role as a safe place for people to anonymously post creepshots of innocent women.

I am OK with that.

As a feminist, I’m disgusted by these actions. This is the sort of action that people who’ve made the mistake of treating anonymity as equaling “male” would undertake. I know it’s surprising to folks, but it’s no longer a man’s web. The stereotype of computer users being nerds who’d drool over the thought of a woman has long since passed. Social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook are dominated by women. Female consumers are the economic engine that makes the Internet profitable.

Ada Lovelace, probably the world’s first computer programmer.

And as someone who values liberty and free speech, I’m disgusted. There are times when anonymous speech is right and just. And then there are times when anonymity is used merely to shield yourself from the consequences of reprehensible behavior. And the latter is what every poster on Reddit who ever posted a creepshot is engaging in. It’s what every pseudonymed commenter on the Journal or GoLocalProv who posts something they’d never ever say in public engages in. You have the right to say whatever horrible thought springs into your head. But you don’t have the right not to suffer consequences. Especially if it’s sexist garbage.

Good on the people behind Predditors for creating consequences.

As an added note, Tuesday was Ada Lovelace Day, named for the first computer programmer.

Princess or President?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

As the mother of a smart and lively five-year old daughter (and of two 6-month old boys,) I never cease to be amazed at the barrage of sexist commentary she’s assaulted with. Statements along the lines of:  “What a beautiful little girl you are”, “I love your shoes”, and my favorite “Are you learning to shop just like mommy?” I often throw in a “she’s also a very smart girl,” but people just look at me blankly as though it’s a forgotten asset. When she was a baby, people frequently assumed she was a boy if she wasn’t dressed in an obvious “girly” color. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Pink, pretty and princesses dominate the little girl landscape. Although my twin boys are certainly told how cute they are, it’s rare that anyone comments on their clothing unless it’s to tease them about a possibly “girlish” color or style (after they’ve first assumed that they are girls.) So what is the effect of this “nurture” by society on our children?

For one thing, women are still largely under represented in leadership positions around the world. Out of 180 countries worldwide, only 27 have elected women presidents, and only 25 have appointed women prime ministers. Of the members of national parliaments worldwide, less than 19 percent are women.[i] In the U.S., in 2011, women made up 46.7% of the labor force but comprised only 14.1% of executive positions and only 16% of board seats in Fortune 500 companies.[ii] This lack of representation starts with sexism in childhood.

A recent example of this is Lego’s new line, specifically targeted at girls, called “Ladyfigs.” LadyFigs are a curvy, make-up and miniskirt wearing new figurine line that requires almost no construction – the antithesis to Lego, which is intended to help kids build spatial, mathematical and fine motor skills. It’s a line of stereotyped chicks – a beautician, a socialite, an animal lover, a popstar and a geek thrown in for good measure. What kind of role models are these to aspire to? It’s caused a lot of outrage amongst men and women alike who deplore the blatant sexism – both obvious and implied (girls can’t build) – of the new line. The debate has sparked multiple high profile editorials pushing back against the “princess culture” and a change.org petition that now has nearly 50,000 signatures. Unfortunately, Lego knows that there’s a real market for it’s new line and, for now, it’s holding its ground. So who’s right? What is Lego saying by marketing these toys? What is the effect of this “nurture?”

There’s a girls t-shirt I love that reads: “Future President, Not Princess.” It’s a gutsy statement that should be a given. When will it be?

 


[i] Statistics from the Women in Public Service Project