What does Congress need to know about working women? The AFL-CIO and Working America have designed a survey to answer this question and deliver it “to every US Representative and Senator as well as state and local officials around the country on Labor Day.”
The Ask A Working Woman Survey asks six questions about concerns affecting working women and twelve background/demographic questions. Interestingly, the choices offered all call for more laws and increased regulation to ensure that the labor market “addresses the concerns” of working women.
Leslie Morgan Steiner from the Washington Post offers her thoughts on what women need.
American politicians, hear me roar:
As a woman, I want to — need to — work to provide for my family, keep my sanity, and give back to my country. But in order to max out my abilities as an employee and mom over the course of my lifetime, I need a few things:
1) Real economic incentives for companies that provide flexible schedules for family caregivers, maternity and paternity leave, onsite day care and aftercare, and a cool, well-lighted place to pump at work
2) At least as many high-quality, affordable child-care centers as there are Dunkin’ Donuts (preferrably next to every Dunkin’ Donuts)
3) A Constitutional amendment protecting women’s rights to birth control (so that we can choose when to work and when to focus on raising kids).
4) Subliminal cultural messages (an advertising campaign, role models on TV and in movies, newspaper articles with supporting data) just like the ones moms have endured for the past 40 (or 40,000) years, but this time communicating the value to American society of supporting women’s efforts to combine work and family. — Washington Post
So women aren’t all that independent. We need the government to intervene to protect us and our interests in the work force. We lack the ability to organize ourselves and negotiate with our employers. We lack the ability to screen employers and choose those who suit our interests best. We need politicians — most likely men — to intervene on our behalf.
And since we are inept at providing a reasonable defense of our beliefs and worth as individuals, we need subliminal messaging to bypass reason and force our points of view on the masses.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Karl Marx would love the popular moves among politicians in various state governments and the federal government to ban so-called "junk" food in schools, and to "put healthy food in" convenience stores and on the tables of those they define as poor. It's a very elitist and arrogant mindset that promotes this ideology, and it needs to be addressed.
Ultimately, the war supporters in Congress prevailed in the vote on the resolution. Still, the vote was significant because it places every member of Congress on the record as supporting or not supporting the unconstitutional, costly, violent occupation of a country that never attacked us. This vote should serve as an important reminder to the American people of where their representatives really stand when it comes to policing the world, empire building, and war.
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works license.
Video published by this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Sampling+ license.
Facebook
Digg
del.icio.us
reddit.com
Newsvine
Magus
Jul 30, 2006
I notice that you didn’t object to point 3 from the Washington Post letter. Being the only one that is even potentially any business of politicians at all.
I wanted to pick a nit with you about the survey, though. It looks like there’s an option to question 3 which you should be able to check, “Eliminate tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas”. Less government meddling!
I wonder if you need to check exactly two boxes (as it requests) in each of those sections for it to count. Hmmm…actually, there isn’t even any text anywhere actually specifying that only women should fill out the survey…nice.
Michael Hampton
Jul 30, 2006
Wow, that survey really does call for more laws, and offers no options for fewer laws. Talk about not getting it.
Dana
Jul 30, 2006
I plead ignorance on point three and that is the only reason I said nothing about it. I did not know that anyone’s right to birth control was actually in jeopardy. Seems like an odd thing for an amendment. And in today’s society, it seems to me that those who, for whatever reason, choose to have more than the “ideal” two children are in for constant social pressure, not those who chose 0, 1 or 2. Parents of more than the traditional amount of children do eventually tire of the comments, “Are you catholic?” and “You know what causes that, right?” Right at the tail end of labor with number three, when a woman is most likely to think that this is the absolute last child, my doctor kindly offered me birth control of the permanent sort. Didn’t bite, but it seemed like an odd time to discuss the matter.
Sorry to mislead there…one option allows for taking away tax breaks for companies who export labor overseas…but I think it is an issue I need to know more about. I don’t really equate the government not taking your money away as increased regulation. Are they saying with that that any company which employs people overseas should not have any sort of tax break? That is a bit of meddling. Or are they referring to some specific tax break especially designed to promote exporting labor overseas?
Dana
Jul 30, 2006
No kidding, Michael. I was considering taking it, but how? My personal concerns are in no way reflected anywhere. Only the concerns of those who think the government should solve our problems are outlined.
Maybe I need to start an alternate list of concerns to deliver to every representative and senator this labor day. One that just says “Stop meddling.”
Michael Hampton
Jul 30, 2006
Hm, there’s a good idea.