/http://womensmediacenter.com/blog/2012/01/exclusive-occupying-the-occupy-movement/
In a world where capitalism is dominated by men, women are left to suffer as victims of the many inequalities created by globalization and defective economic systems. Women perform 60% of work worldwide, they earn 10% of income, and own 10% of the land (Eitzen and Bacca Zinn, 243). Do these statistics exaggerate reality or merely emphasize it? We, as a society, are aware that gender is an important factor in determining one’s employment position and income. For this reason, women have and are coming together to make their voices be heard and to bring change through women’s movements. Numerous studies have been conducted to prove and support the fact that there is a substantial difference in the earnings and wages of men and women.
In a world where capitalism is dominated by men, women are left to suffer as victims of the many inequalities created by globalization and defective economic systems. Women perform 60% of work worldwide, they earn 10% of income, and own 10% of the land (Eitzen and Bacca Zinn, 243). Do these statistics exaggerate reality or merely emphasize it? We, as a society, are aware that gender is an important factor in determining one’s employment position and income. For this reason, women have and are coming together to make their voices be heard and to bring change through women’s movements. Numerous studies have been conducted to prove and support the fact that there is a substantial difference in the earnings and wages of men and women.
Sociological concepts such as the “glass ceiling” help us understand and recognize the barriers that prevent women from progressing and rising to top levels at work. Those of which include, but are not limited to, “sex-segregated training and educational programs, restrictive eligibility requirements, seniority rights, the lack of training and career development opportunities, excessive time commitments, as well as the lack of family-sensitive employee benefits that constrain women's promotional opportunities" (Harlan, Berheide 4). Moreover, the patriarchy that prevails in Occupy movements further progresses the oppression of women in the job market and the work force. As the article argues, women, not only men, should protest against the high unemployment rates, corruption, and the social and economic disparities that exist among the 99% and the 1%.
Do you agree with the article's recommendations for changing the direction of the occupy movements? The writer clearly states the need of change from public occupation to more repetetive demonstrations, and a shift of leadership to a largely female front. Or do you only agree with one (either the leadership change or the demonstration change)?
Do you believe, maybe, that the occupy movement should entirely be a women's movement? Not just the men taking a step down, but completely leaving the protest's identity? Do you think there is a more effective way to have these women's movements gain more ground?
Do you believe, maybe, that the occupy movement should entirely be a women's movement? Not just the men taking a step down, but completely leaving the protest's identity? Do you think there is a more effective way to have these women's movements gain more ground?
In the article “Exclusive: Occupying the Occupy Movement” by Robin Morgan, I agree with the article’s recommendation that the course of the occupy movement needs improvement and change. I believe that these movements needs more representation of women in a massive amount of numbers, it would bring across their message with more power and it would be safer as well. By not having a good number of women representing in the movements, they are more vulnerable to attacks on them. The article states, “Incidents of sexual assault and rape have been reported not only in New York, Cleveland, Dallas, and Baltimore, but in Glasgow, Montreal, London, and more. In some locations, male site monitors were reluctant to call police for fear that negative attention would be deleterious to the Occupy “message’” (Morgan, 1). It is incidents like these that weaken the message that the women are trying to bring attention to. This also forces the women to be selective and careful about where they protest, it limits where they can go. “Harassment and assaults required women to define safe sleeping areas—immediate necessities yet questionable strategically, since these can become “ghettos,” while the problem, a male sense of entitlement, goes unchallenged” (Morgan, 1). By having larger numbers of representation of women, it would ensure them a little more safety. Also, these movements should me mostly if not entirely female because of what females have to offer. “The Occupy movement needs women—the numbers, the economic analysis, the different strategic approach—to survive, let alone succeed” (Robin, 1). Women are especially good at appealing to pathos, emotions, and could use that as an approach. “Occupy movement in many areas moves away from the tactic of claiming physical space, a change of protest style is in order: more hit-and-run, engage-disengage, morning-long, afternoon-long, or day-long (not open-ended) demonstrations—plus focused, doable demands. Most women have far too many other responsibilities—including children—to spend months in tents playing drums, even if the tents were safe spaces” (Robin, 1). This is a major problem in women movements, the women aren’t usually long term because of the responsibilities that they have in their life and the demands of family. Overall, if women had the strength in numbers with primarily female representation and more long term females protesting, I believe that the movements would get their message across further.
ReplyDeleteI do not agree with the article when the author states that more repetitive demonstration are needed. With demonstrations, it forces dangerous situations for our women who are forced to assimilate to the wants of men. Although I do see why the author might make such suggestion. With more active protest and women being forceful it allows them to feel power. It also shows that women will stand up for what they believe. I can say I do agree with the ideal that there is a need for a large transition to more women to the front. Rather then this hegemony idealistic thought that men are more qualified or posses some other attributions that women do not. When it comes to the economic system and women, the econmice system is definetly defected. Women have been and are still facing immense inequalities because of men dominance. Women deserves equal shares, just like men do. I never believe in being sexist in any form, but seemingly society does. The Occupy Movement should have a larger mass movement of women rather then men. Although, I do think would be in favor of women to have a small percent of male colleagues. Women have to endure things such as safety issues and being patronize. Also as women they are faced with motherly duties that might include taking care of children and the home. This does not allow them to carry out there entire protest. With large amounts of women, their strength, endurance, and dedication will be seen and therefore they might have more success.
ReplyDelete(From Mireya Prado):
ReplyDeleteI think that the occupy movement not only needs a new direction, but a direction in general. I think that the question of an end point for the movement is not a clear one, and so we need one. I think that women are being under represented in this movement and it is do to many environmental factors as well as situational. If Eitzen and Bacca Zinn are correct when they say that women do 60% percent of the worlds work, I think that it is safe to say that most of the women who could take part of the occupy movement are off to work. Then again we should ask ourselves, what is the make up of the United States? It seems to me that the occupy movement has left behind those who do not identify or understand the movement. Women, who come from low-income background and do not speak English, will not be interested in occupying anything. I think that occupy needs a direction, one that can reach more people overall. The author’s suggestion to shift leadership to a largely female front sounds promising. I think that women should be able to step out and occupy what ever they would like with out feeling in danger or harassed. I do not think that the reason they should be out there is to stir “apathy.” I have a problem with this because that positions the female as the victim again. The idea of victimizing females again comes at a greater cost because our rights are would not be given to us because we were thought to be capable but because we were weak and indeed were not capable. I do not say this to defend arguments that we should stand there and take it; I say that we should fight with out victimizing ourselves.
If occupy is to become a women’s movement I would like there to be a clear “women’s issue” that will be addressed. If there is none, then in deed it will be a feminist movement. One that I prefer, because I believe that the inclusion of men and women form different classes, races, and cultures should be able to come together for a greater good. I think that through a feminist lens not only can we address women’s issues but also other bodies who suffer from the same or relevant issues. For example a female occupying wall street might not feel same being in a tent on her own because men are the majority. I think the same can be said by a gay man who is surrounded (or can be surrounded) by heterosexual men who he does not know if they are comfortable with his identify. Should we not align with that man because he is not a woman? I think that intersectionality, is the best response to a shift in leadership and in addressing women’s issues.