n My reaction to Olena Ripnick's article ("As a majority, women need to stand up and be counted," Sept. 27, p. 5) can be summed up in one word: Amen!
Finally, I read a straightforward, factual argument illustrating how women are ignored and marginalized in our country. There is no denying the numbers, or lack thereof. Women simply are not fairly represented in our government. And how do we explain that the United States, the supposed leader of the free world, has not yet had a female president while countries such as Great Britain have? It is shameful.
When Ripnick writes, "... we're still being governed by the same patriarchy that has historically oppressed us," she is exactly right. This oppression has taken a different form than our traditional view of women as unable to vote, own property or have a career.
Instead, our oppression is more subtle today.
One need only scroll through the music channels, watch the news or read the literary canon to understand that society values women not for their strong minds or achievements, but for their beautiful bodies and sexual prowess.
Ripnick is also correct when she alludes to the fact that our government is predominantly run by old, white males -- males who constantly enact laws that deeply effect women. These laws affect how both sexes are taught sex education, what regulations are placed on women's bodies in the arena of reproductive rights and whether or not emergency contraception is available to women.
The fact that men are allowed to decide how a female is allowed to interact with her body is ridiculous. Would a panel of women ever be allowed to pass laws about penises?
Additionally, decisions affecting family support systems, such as childcare programs (the US has a lack of affordable, adequate childcare), healthcare (the US is the only major industrial nation that does not have national health coverage for everybody) and parental leave policies are made by these men.
In a society where women are expected to "be all," from mother to wife to employee, there is no doubt that these issues directly affect women's ability to juggle their roles. Who will speak for us, if we do not speak for ourselves?
Katie Buck and Jennifer Clark responded to Ripnick's article writing, "Women should not have to conform themselves or their votes to a single view of what a woman should be." I agree. Women are multi-faceted individuals with differing political, emotional and social views.
We are capable human beings, able to build businesses, become leaders and dissect theories. In short, we can do what the boys can do. But where is that represented in today's government?
As for Ripnick's "single view" of what a woman should be, she argues that women should be strong, smart and assertive, but above all, represented. So take your different views about economics, world trade, healthcare and education to the voting booths.
Hannah Curtis
CAS '08
Alexandra Smith
CAS '08
Be the first to comment on this article!