August 3, 2016 • 46 mins
Betty Friedan's homophobia has haunted the National Organization for Women. In the second part of their up-close look at the early years of NOW, Cristen and Caroline talk to Terry O'Neill about how the group moved forward from its lesbian schism and their crucial activism that continues today.
Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Welcome to Stuff Mom Never Told You from how Stuff
Works dot Com. Hello, and welcome to the podcast. I'm
Kristin and I'm Caroline, and welcome back to Part two
of Now and Then, which Caroline, I'm gonna admit it,
I did name these episodes after the classic movie Now
(00:24):
and Then about childhood girl friendships. I think I mean
that's applicable to talk about the feminist movement. Uh. We
we get images going back into these girls past and
they were growing up, and then we flash forward to
see where they are in the present. And we're kind
of doing that with our conversation with Terry, looking into
(00:45):
now's past and then going forward and looking at where
they are and where they're going, and to extend are
now and then metaphor just one one step farther. You know,
the story is about all these these girls with different personalities,
because of course you have to have that for an
On Thomble comedy. That's enjoyable, cam Um, and this part
(01:09):
two episode picking up as the women's liberal ration movement
is really coming into its own. We are starting to
see what happens when we have kind of a clash
of personalities, when we have a lot of different women
from a lot of different backgrounds and with a lot
of different ideas in the same room, and the trouble
(01:30):
that can arise specifically when the woman in the front
of that room starts to get paranoid about lesbian interlopers. Essentially, yeah,
I think I think this example has ceased to be hypothetical,
and we we are specifically talking about Betty for Dan.
Oh yeah, we're no longer and now and then no
Christina Ricci and Rosie o'donald far away, We're talking about
(01:54):
Betty for Dan. Um. And as we teased to at
the end of the last episode, UM, this moment in
the late sixties and early seventies where Betty for Dan
is kind of escorted to the side, UM is a
really important moment that deserves more attention and understanding of
(02:18):
ours as millennial feminist. Because the standard line is, oh, well,
National Organization for Women try to kick call it's lesbians
out at one point, so well, you know, they must
be terrible. And while there is a grain of truth
to that, Terry O'Neill, who is the current president of
the National Organization for Women, has some very helpful nuance
(02:40):
to add to also give some insight as to how
Betty for Dan's homophobia um affected people within the organization
and like what they think about that today. Yeah, so
let's hear what she had to say in terms of
that nuance. You know, I'm Betty for Dan did lasting
lasting damn to the organization because of her attitude. It
(03:03):
wasn't just that one phrase, although the phrase it's just
it's just horrible, but it was truly her belief that
we would not get that. She had this hierarchical um view.
She came quite frankly, she came out of economic justice
labor movement and which to this day remains unfortunately hierarchical
(03:23):
sort of our our issues first, and then we will
come back and get your issues. And that was the
way Betty fer Dan approached it um and then and
and and shockingly to me, she says us and them
when she's talking about women. I mean, the last time
I checked, lesbians are women. In any event, she did
do last thing damage in nineteen seventy one, her her
(03:46):
view was soundly defeated, soundly defeated within the organization. Nineteen
seventy one, that is when the organization adopted clear policy
that lesbians are women and lesbian rights are one of
our core a shoe areas. So uh forty five out
of our fifty years we have had lesbian rights. Of course,
it eventually grew to LGBT now it's lgbt q I
(04:08):
a uh full civil and human rights. But that but
but she did lose, and it was a it was
an organization wide conversation and her view was defeated. So
also going on during this time, though, you've got the
strike free Quality. On August seventy we get this huge
(04:29):
strike free Quality that signals basically the start of the
women's lib movement and attracts a ton of women to
local NOW chapters. So the strike was intended to commemorate
the fiftieth anniversary of the nineteenth Amendment and also call
for three main things, abortion demand, twenty four hour child
(04:49):
care centers, and equal education and employment opportunities for women.
Major three major ways to be able to control your life,
be able to say what you how you want to
live your life. Yeah, and one really fascinating like byproduct
of the strike was that it attracted a lot of housewives,
(05:11):
you know, women who were in those local chapters of
NOW who would probably see the New York organization and say,
you know that's not for me. I'm not in Manhattan.
I'm like Susie in Kansas, and I've got three kids,
and I do feel oppressed, but I don't know what
to do about it. And then the strike happens and
gets all this media attention and they're like, oh, there's
(05:33):
a chapter here, I can get involved. And in the
same way as those younger activists out of the Civil
rights movement brought consciousness raising to the organization, these new
or more suburban now members were more into things like
correcting media images of women and gender stereotyping in children's books,
(05:56):
which makes sense, you know, meet people where they're at. Uh,
there're folks more on those kinds of things that they
immediately identified with versus fixing job discrimination. We'll see. I mean,
I love when we hit on these very clear examples
in so many of our episodes, where it's clearly so
important to have people with a diverse set of backgrounds
(06:17):
and viewpoints and life experiences and sure absolutely diversity in
race and ethnicity, diversity and age, but also, like I said,
just diversity in life experience, because what a great idea
to tackle the children's book stereotype. Yeah, I mean a
very basic thing that probably, you know, a radical feminist
(06:38):
in Brooklyn might not be as focused on, and not
because she is not as good of a feminist, um,
but simply because, like you said, it's all about those
you know, personal connections to things that are relevant to you.
It's all about following that anger. Really. I mean, I'm
kind of into that tactic personally, although sometimes following my
anger means I just need to eat. Oh yeah, blood
(07:01):
sugar is getting real low. Sure. Yeah, But by nineteen
seventy four, Now has really come into its own. In
addition to expanding its platforms to encompass lesbians, it's also
passed the resolution to focus more on women of color
and address racism within the organization itself. And there are
(07:22):
more than forty thousand members at this point in a
thousand chapters across the country. That's not small potatoes, I know.
So this thing is, I mean this, I know, feminism is,
it's happening. It's happening. So as NOW is growing, it's
attracting all of those thousands of members across the entire country.
(07:43):
A diversity of viewpoints, a diversity of backgrounds, we start
to see sort of this delicate and and challenging balancing
act that's happening between legitimizing a hierarchy in the organization
but also balancing that against participant tory angry and rightfully
so membership. Yeah, because you have this formal, top down
(08:07):
structure with local grassroots chapters at the bottom, and that
structure kind of hampered diversity initially and kind of led
to some of those schisms that we mentioned um and
a lot of it's the organization's growth also led to
(08:28):
organizational problems because there really wasn't a middle structure between
you know, National Now and these local chapters. But those
local chapters really just thrived on anger probably and and
enthusiasm because you have local Now activists who would create
their own packets on effective lobbying, filing discrimination suits, contacting
(08:52):
the media, things about sexist imagery, you know, because they
did not have websites and and Google Shared drive, you know,
where you could set up, you know, a standard packet
for everyone, so they were just doing it on their own,
kind of passing along these tactics analog style. But Okay,
when you said enthusiasm, I can't help it, but I
(09:15):
immediately picture you know, those like college banners theople can wave.
I immediately picture like a crowd of wildly enthusiastic women
waving those little collegiate banners that say angry and and
feminist and and and I just and then I like
went off on a tangent my brain about how I
want those banners, like a pennant and angry feminist, an
(09:37):
angry feminist penn And maybe it's as angry on one
side and feminist on the other, and you can just
wave them back and forth, love it, scream for an
end of the wage gap. I would get on public
transit with that. I would get in every crowded elevator
that I see. Um, yes, someone someone on Etsy? Can
you get on that? If someone hasn't already made of um?
(10:00):
And One thing kind of peculiar about Now was that
the leaders were experts in law, media and politics, as
we mentioned, but they were not experts in movement making.
I mean, at the beginning, Betty for Dan's vision for
Now was to make it a relatively small and exclusive
(10:21):
group of influencers. Essentially, you know, like you said a
while back, like she kind of hand picked these women
at the top of their fields, like the most brilliant
feminist women that she knew, with the goal of what
just having them with the goal of influencing politics and policy. Yeah,
so not necessarily doing all of that organizing and angry
(10:42):
Pennant waving exactly. I guarantee you Betty for Dan was
not thinking about like sexist imagery in children's books when
she wanted to start this um. And the thing is,
regardless of what your organizational goal is, when you have
a massively diverse and geographically scattered group of people and
(11:04):
identities and politics under the same umbrella, you're gonna have challenges.
You're probably gonna have some schisms. I mean, these are
just natural byproducts I think of of an organization that
is succeeding. So I think some of the side eye
that now has received is really unfounded because it's, I
(11:26):
don't know, it's almost like we have expected feminists to
be too perfect in a way, you know, to not
have disagreements and to not be you know, and not
to have prejudices as well. Sure, yeah, I know. And
and as much as we want our feminist leaders from
(11:47):
whatever group to be these perfect, amazing, upstanding humans, we're
all imperfect. I mean, that's part of the work, right,
That's part of the work is uncovering our bias, is
in our prejudices and rooting them out so we can
work for a greater good. Well, And that's and that's
one of the stunning things looking at this early history
(12:08):
is how swiftly this increasingly diverse group of women evolved
in terms of their platforms and kind of holding themselves
accountable to their own privileges and prejudices. But at the beginning,
you know, it probably did not look like an organization
(12:29):
that would survive for fifty years because you have a
lot of second wave groups meanwhile that we're flaming up
and flaming out really quickly. So that's a big question too,
Like what has been the staying power of the National
Organization for Women. I mean, you've got anger. Anger is
(12:50):
pretty powerful UM and the whole thing of making the
personal political. But Terry O'Neil really attributes it to the
power of grassroots organizing. I think the reason now has
survived for long UM is a because we have remained
grassroots and driven by the grassroots. I can tell you
(13:10):
that it will doing and running an organization that way
will make you old before your time. But it gives
such power to the grass rooms. And we have two
and thirty active chapters and action teams as we're calling
them around the country, all of which you're autonomous. They
do not take their orders from National They they they
(13:32):
National Now. The president of National Now speaks for the
national organization. Each chapter president speaks for her organization. They
decide on their own policies and programs. Obviously they can't
they can't violate National Now policy, but beyond that, they
are autonomous and that has proved to be to to
to really be sort of the backbone of resiliency for
(13:54):
the organization. The other piece I think that has kept
us UM viable is precisely the multi issue our dedication
to multi issues, and it is not just our our
dedication to these multiple issues, but it's our very clear
policy that we are not permitted to elevate one issue
(14:16):
over another. We have removed individuals from leadership UM in
the organization who tried to elevate one issue over another.
We are very clear that that is not how you
get equality for women and Now is more than just
grassroots organizing or angry pennant waving I mean, there are
some very real, concrete accomplishments and successes that they've been
(14:38):
able to usher in. Yeah, and probably successes that folks
aren't aware of. So of course, UM we asked Harry
to share some of her success stories. Well, let's see, first,
let's just talk about the first thing that occurs to me.
Of course, I'm going to go right back to the elections,
because that's where my head is. But but UM NOW
(14:59):
was one of organizations that early on created a political
action committee and the focus was to elect more feminist
women to office. And we have always, UH, the pack
has always endorsed men as well as women. We endorse
on issues UM exclusively. We do have a rule if
you have a man running against a woman and they
(15:21):
are both equally qualified, equally endorsable, then we do endorse
the women. That's a rare occurrence, UM. But anyway, so,
so one of the biggest UH successes that I think
we've had is the election of more and more and
more women to office, both at the state level and
in Congress. I mean, when NOW started out in nineteen sixty,
(15:42):
there were hardly any women in the United States Congress.
Today it's only it's not nearly enough. But we also
have Hillary Clinton running for president, and we have we
are building a bench of women leaders uh that will
come after Hillary Clinton and run for president and run
for governor of various states and so forth. So that's
(16:04):
I think a huge win. Another huge win that we had.
And this is this is something that I think a
lot of people don't know the history of it, and
it is it is one of the most uh for me, wrenching.
It's the wrenching when and that is the Violence Against
Women Act. Now I can tell you that after the
Violence Against Women Act was passed in the nineteen mid
(16:25):
nineteen nineties, incidents of domestic violence, homicide dropped, precipitously, absolutely dropped, precipitously.
Violence Against Women Act simply provides the programs and funding
UH for intimate partner violence to stop it and also
to respond to it, um and in a way that
is victims centered. That was new in the mid nineteen nineties.
(16:47):
Why do I say it was wrenching. It was wrenching
because the political process in the ninety nineties, if you
recall Newt Gingrich was what was in charge of the
House UM and I need to uh NU Gingbridge was
certainly very much a leader at the time. There was
all these very conservative legislators in both the House and
(17:10):
the Senate UM and the compromise it was made was
to have the UM the Omnibus Crime Bill was passed,
and the Violence Against Women Act was part of that
Omnibus Crime Bill. And the Omnibus Crime Bill provided lots
of money for training police and prosecutors and judges around
(17:34):
domestic violence and intimate partner violence. But it also created
an enormous amount of money for community policing, which has
over the years been perverted into stop and frisk right
and in and later on in subsequent UM years, the
US military frankly began dumping a lot of its material
(17:56):
into local police forces. And so with this community policing
now becomes community occupation in many communities and anyway. But
but but quite frankly, UH, freeing women, giving women tools
to UH to leave intimate partner violence has been quite revolutionary.
(18:17):
So that was that was the second huge win that
we had, and I would say the third win that
we had was really driven by now and an organization
called Legal Momentum UH, which is which does litigation for
women's rights UH. We sued, We brought a racketeering suit
against extremist organizations that were blockading abortion clinics and UH
(18:40):
and and threatening violence against abortion providers and just we're
really is again. This was in the late ninety nines.
I think we filed the lawsuit, we won a nationwide
injunction as a result of which attacks on abortion clinics
plummeted by more than eighty percent UM. That was a
huge win during the During the time that litigation was
(19:03):
going on, we also were able to pass the Freedom
of what is the freedom of Access to clinic entrances,
the FACE Act, which essentially makes it a federal crime
to block clinic entrances. It doesn't mean that they can't
still harass providers. They clearly are doing that. Um. But
our our efforts to stop the violence against UH clinics
(19:25):
had huge impact and really really was very helpful. Caroline,
as a person who has periods and the host of
stuff I never told you, I am delighted to promote Lola,
which is a startup founded by women for women, all
(19:47):
about tampons. I mean, is there anything smintier than that?
That's pretty sminty. And the great thing about these tampons.
Is that Yeah. Not only is it coming out of
this great women driven company, but these tampons that they've
created are one natural and therefore easy to feel good about.
(20:08):
Unlike a lot of those major tampon brands out there,
Lola offers complete transparency about the ingredients that are in
their tampons. They are one cotton with no at A chemicals, fragrances, synthetics,
or dies, and Lola is customizable. You can choose your
(20:28):
preferred assortment of eighteen, light, regular, or Super tampons. You
can also decide how many boxes you'd like delivered right
to your door and select your shipment frequency. You can cancel,
skip in order or modify your subscription at any time.
Lola will email you two days before your boxes ship,
(20:50):
and they pride themselves on no surprises or gimmicks, which, really,
if we're talking about menstruation, it's great that there are
no surprises or gimmicks here. You can wear all the
white pants you want, yes, so thank you for that,
Lola and listeners. Of course, we have a special deal
for you for sixty percent off your first Lola order.
(21:12):
Visit my Lola dot com and enter mom Stuff when
you subscribe. That's right, and don't forget for six off
that first order. Go to my lola dot com and
enter code mom stuff. And now back to the show.
(21:32):
And of course there are initiatives that the National Organization
for Women has not been able to see through. Muriel Fox,
when she was talking to Time magazine in June, highlighted
the issue of childcare for women. I mean that is
still a massive, perpetual problem problem. Yeah, especially in the
(21:53):
United States. Um. She also highlighted the emphasis on end
of visual rather than institutional change. A lah Lean in
that our kind of popular feminist mantras can over focus on, right,
the idea being we do still need to band together,
(22:17):
we need each other, we still need this grassroots organizing.
We can't all be expected to like bootstrap it. And
just the focus on the individual leaning in is not
the answer in every situation, right. I mean, our workplaces
should be held accountable to change as well. Um. And
she's also very frustrated by the constant likability penalty that
(22:42):
ambitious women face. Oh yeah, and I mean obviously Hillary
Clinton being like a one example of this whole likability penalty.
But there's another issue that we're going to devote a
podcast too in the future. Which is the Equal Rights
Amendment UM that I asked Terry about specifically A because UM,
(23:07):
I'm I wanted to learn more about it, partially for
selfish reasons because we're going to do a podcast on
it in the future, UM, but also because it's this
piece of legislation that is such a no brainer in
so many ways, and yet was stymied. And Terry fills
(23:30):
us in on the whole background of the Equal Rights Amendment.
If you're not aware of what it is, that is
one of the most fascinating stories. So women win the
vote in nineteen twenty and immediately Alice Paul, who was
one of the major um leaders of the fight for
women's suffrage, immediately right the next document that she wants
(23:52):
to pass, which is the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution.
She wrote it in the nineteen twenties. It was it
was submitted to Congress repeatedly in Congress after Congress after Congress.
In nineteen seventy two, finally Congress passes UH the proposed
Equal Rights Amendment, which simply says equality of rights under
the law shall not be abridged on account of sex
(24:14):
so that's nineteen seventy two. The only way they're able
to get it passed is they they stuck on a
originally a seven year then it became a ten year
um time limit. Only if thirty five states ratify within
the within ten years, then the e r A becomes
part of the constitution. In the early going, the e
(24:34):
r A caught on like wildfire. Was it was by
nineteen seventy six. I believe it was by nineteen seventy six,
and the thing comes out of Congress in seventy two,
and I think that by nineteen seventy six fully thirty
five states had already ratified. Then comes the backlash. The
Catholic Church, a lot of the chambers of commerce and
the commercial world. The business community was viciously app to
(25:00):
the Equal Rights Amendment for reasons I have never understood,
but they put huge resources into stopping it. The the
the so Elinor Smil, who at the time was the
president of of the National Organization for Women, decided that
that now had to make the e r A a huge,
huge issue, one less push, Let's get all of those
(25:21):
thirty eight states ratified. So she created a nationwide action
campaign that was years long. It was remarkable, it was galvanizing,
it was UH. It was just this huge, huge effort. UM.
Ultimately we fell three vote, three states short of ratification. UM.
(25:43):
Some people at the time said that the r A
was dead. It turns out it was stalled. It was
not dead. It's it's stalled. We we believe that the
ten year UH time limit with bogus and UH and
and not effective. So we are still working to pass
to ratify the e r A with three three more states.
But here's the amazing part of what happened, that huge
(26:04):
movement with men and women supporting the Equal Rights Amendment.
Even though we failed to get those last three states
to ratify it, it absolutely sparked a sea change in
people's attitudes. So n two comes and those of those
last three states have not ratified the amendment. Then by
(26:29):
the end of the nineteen nineties, the surveys are showing
that huge majorities, I'm talking eightieso odd percent of men,
nineties odd percent of women are all saying that women
should have equality and that it should be in the constitution.
And se of them now say it already is in
the constitution. So you have to ask yourself What did
(26:51):
those women do in the nineteen eighties after the e
r A failed to get those three votes? What was
going on? It was absolutely remarkable. They remained active, they
remain determined to achieve equality, and in fact, because they
had such huge public support, overwhelming public support for the
(27:15):
concept of women's equality, they were able to move forward,
um in huge numbers. Ten years after two comes two, right,
that is the year that huge numbers of women get
elected to Congress. So it was you just can't call
it a defeat when you look at what happened afterwards.
(27:35):
It was the leaders of the leaders of the movement,
It was the leaders of NOW, it was the leaders
of other women's organizations saw that there was all this
energy and UH and they used it UH and they
handled it into making more games in other ways. But
if for some reason you're not as deeply interested in
the r A as we are and thinking that the
(27:56):
fight for for the e r A is as old news, um,
I mean, we have to emphasize the fact that NOW
is very much still active in pushing for institutional change
and is massively and has been massively influential UH in
the legal arena as well, especially when it comes to
(28:18):
protecting and expanding women's rights. And along those lines, Kristen,
you asked her about the Stanford rape case and the
whole campaign that rose up around it to get the
judge on that case recalled. I think it's important to
recall this judge. I am so grateful to Professor Michelle
Dauber at Stanford who is leading the recall case and UH,
(28:42):
and I hope your listeners will go will go to
recall Aaron Persky dot com or recall Judge Persky dot com.
Both of those go to Professor Dauber's website that she
has set up. This is going to be a costly effort,
but I think it's possible to get that man off
the bench entirely, not relying on him to be to resign,
(29:04):
but we are. But I think that the voters out
in California need to take him out um of that position.
He doesn't belong on the bench. And I think that
this is going to have huge repercussions because it's going
to prove that we can do something that collectively, we
who care about UH sexual assault, we can actually take
action that is impactful. It will UM. I think it
(29:28):
is now part of the growing movement to stop rape
on campus UM, which is also quite frankly, a movement
to stop rape in the military, and it's a movement
to UM to end UH and trafficking girls in middle
school and high school. It's a different type of issue,
but sexual assault and sexual violence I think are becoming
(29:51):
UM important issues nationwide. And I hope the recalling Judge
Persky can be a huge step towards signaling to all
of the other judges out there that it is not
okay to somehow justify a vicious a vicious felony because
a young man also knows how to swim and is white.
So and I don't think you can you can eliminate
(30:12):
the racial aspect of this. Uh. Just think what might
have happened if the perpetrator had not been right and
had not been a star athlete. So so that's that's
part of it. UM. I also think that UM, I
think it's very important because I had this conversation with
with a number of people the other day, and uh,
(30:35):
you know, there are two systems of law that exist
that are relevant to sexual trauma and sexual assault. One
is our criminal justice system. And the criminal justice system
does not put the victim at the center of its concern.
In fact, it's the state versus perpetrator, it's not victim
(30:55):
versus perpetrators. So that you've got the criminal justice system
where the commune of the itself has been offended and
is putting this criminal away. Then you have Title nine
on college campuses, which exists to ensure that every um
woman gets an equal educational opportunity, and that would include
victims of sexual assault. So colleges have an obligation to
(31:17):
ensure the equal educational opportunity of all of their students,
that that that the equal educational opportunity is not served
if all you do is turn this guy over to
the police. Of course, you have to turn a rapist
over the over to the police. But in addition, schools
have an obligation to ensure that the victim received a
(31:38):
fully equal education. To me, all that says that the
National Organization for Women is not to be taken for
granted and is still incredibly relevant. Um. Along those same lines,
one thing that I definitely wanted to ask Terry about
(31:59):
in terms of taining their relevance is how she sees
activism intersecting with technology and social media, because obviously, you know,
they likely said there was no Google share Drive, there
was no Twitter back in the day when all everything
was getting off the ground. So it's also been really
(32:23):
crucial for the organization to remain current in terms of
how we communicate with each other and you know, publicize
feminist platforms to the world at large and listen, Terry
thinks that social media is terrific specifically for intersectionality. Digital
(32:46):
activism has actually grown to be a really key part
of grass eas Active Graphs organizing. For now UM I
will tell you that many of our chapters do an
enormous amount of their organizing through Facebook because it's a
very friendly platform for doing things. It is no longer
the case that most women can travel long distances to
(33:07):
go to a monthly chapter meeting. Many do. Many have
virtual meetings of their chapters instead, So utilizing the online
tools is huge. And of course UM pushing your message
out by social media and following your allies and understanding
what their messages has been a key part of being
(33:27):
able to respond quickly, so a rapid response to things
that are going on. In fact, it was it was
the New York City Now Chapter president who actually UM
contacted me and said, how about if you and California
Now and I all put together this letter about Judge Persky.
And I said, Wow, Sonia, if you could do that,
(33:47):
I would be forever grateful. So she took the lead
on it. UM the Um. The existence of social media,
I think is huge. I think something else is happening
and I and I know it's has happened for me
UM and for many of the NOW leaders that I
interact with, and I'm hoping that it permeates throughout the
(34:08):
entire organization. And it's this. Some of the most eloquent
and and active individuals on Twitter are African American women.
It just so happens that the most reliably progressive voters
in our country right now as a group are African
American women. I think that social media has given feminists,
(34:32):
particularly anti racist feminists, an opportunity to interact with these
amazing women and to learn from these amazing women, and
to have their understanding of the feminist agenda deeply informed
by these amazing African American women and Latinas and Latino
Xes who are who are all on social media, and
(34:53):
so I think that that is broadening and deepening our
understanding of what the feminist agenda is all about. Well,
so speaking of current with digital activism and remaining relevant
through things like social media, you know, we wanted to
know what the future holds for this very important grassroots
organization now that it's fifty, Now that it's reached I
(35:15):
guess middle age, Well, what does the future hold well?
For one thing, the Equal Rights Amendment Round two around Basilian,
if you count all of the initiatives to get it
past now is at the moment formulating a national action
campaign around an intersectional interpretation of the e r A.
(35:39):
Not only do we want to ratify the e r A,
we want to make sure that the r A is
relevant for immigrant women, that it's relevant for African American women,
that it's relevant for pregnant women and relevant for women
who don't want to get pregnant, That it's relevant for
lesbians and transgender women and the entire lgbt q i
A community. We're we're going to be rolling stuff out
(36:00):
and it's one of the most exciting parts to me
of the e r A. UM. I keep hearing the
critique that it's only about gender, but I don't believe that.
I think that if we had any r A, for example,
we could force a change in the immigration laws, which currently,
if you look at them, they are very skewed against
immigrant women. Um. So it is not the case that
(36:24):
you can't be intersectional with the e r A. So
we're starting that project, which I'm very excited about. But
Caroline Terry all around is just super pumped to be
doing the work of now right now. Yeah. I mean
I mentioned this at the very beginning that she did
her fist pump as she was passionately talking with Kristen
(36:47):
and me and how I just think she's fabulous and
it's so obvious, and I hope it's obvious having heard
the interview with her, I hope it's obvious how passionate
and excited she is to be doing this work. Yeah. Well,
her and and all of the people that we saw
and that we met at the conference. Um, which really
(37:09):
it's for me at least, it really deepened my understanding
of the movement at large, because I mean, you have
you had women who were there from the mid sixties
who are still working at today who are still angry
covered in now button buttons. Decades of button listen now
has button swag nailed that button game. Who it is
(37:32):
on point? They slay those buttons. What excites me the
most is this moment that we're in. Look, just go
figure you've got and you've got a woman who was
proudly feminist, um, who has run a campaign of inclusivity
on issues and an inclusive campaign but specifically on the
shoes all right, running as the Democratic nominee for President
(37:55):
of the United States of America. And you have a demagogue,
a deeply misogynistic, racist, xenophobic demagogue running against her. You
could not have a more stark, I think, um description
(38:16):
of exactly what this what this country is struggling with, right,
we are struggling with. I I do view Hillary Clinton's
candidacy as our opportunity to make a clean break with
our racist and sexist and homophobic past and and to
reject Donald Trump as the epitome of what we don't
(38:37):
like about America's history, and to and to move forward
with with with with a real promise of equality for
all the different communities that are that are that make
up this country. Yeah. Well, thank you so so much
(39:02):
to Terry O'Neil for talking to us, giving us her
time and also to the organization for having us at
the conference. Um, we were truly honored to go and listeners,
Hopefully this has been as informative and helpful of a
history lesson for you as it has been for us. Yeah.
(39:24):
And if I mean, if we if this episode and
the conversation with Terry can play a role in reducing
some of those generational gaps and misunderstandings, UM, I will
be super pleased. I think you know, there will always
be divisions and how people of different ages, backgrounds, whatever,
see the world. But if we can help bridge that
(39:46):
chasm of misunderstanding, uh, to show that the women of
now and the second Waivers were not across the board
one entity. Yeah, I mean, and it's just so there's
just so much that we today as millennial feminists, however
you want to identify yourself. There's so much that we
have to learn from that period in time about how
(40:11):
things were not so long ago and how much things
have changed, and that we are should not take any
of it for granted. Um, but also how much certain
things have not changed, and how we do need to
stay angry and keep following that anger and wave our
angry feminist penance and If you want to learn more
(40:31):
about now and or get involved, you can head over
to their website at now dot org. And we'd love
to hear from you about everything that we've been talking
about today and everything that Terry shared with us. Mom
Stuff at how Stuff works dot com is our email address.
You can also tweet us at Mom's Stuff podcast or
(40:54):
messages on Facebook, and we've got a couple of messages
to share with you right now. So I have a
letter here from Lauren on our Women in Political Campaigning
episode from a little while back, and Lauren writes, I'm
a twenty two year old recent college graduate who's working
(41:16):
as a political fundraiser in d C for a mid
sized trade association. In college, I worked in several roles
on my home representatives campaigns, including as an intern and
later as a field organizer. In both campaign cycles, my
REPS chief of staff was a woman, and the majority
of staff at all levels were women. While I recognize
(41:36):
that this is true for a minority of campaigns, I
think my ability to work in an almost entirely female
campaign environment gave me the confidence that I could hold
any position in a campaign office that I wanted. I
think you missed the mark slightly in what seemed to
be your suggestion that fundraising jobs are less prestigious and
not outward facing in campaigns, while they aren't in the
(41:59):
same war room, and as serily, finance directors are almost
always included in all high level meetings. After all, no
strategy can be implemented if you don't have the funds
to back it up. Finance directors are counted on to
know how much money is currently in the bank, what
the day to day cost of operating the campaign is,
and how much campaign can be expected to raise as
the cycle continues. While a low level fundraiser might stay
(42:22):
in the office and make arrangements for the next event
or make invitations. I think that fundraising jobs are frequently
some of the most outward facing jobs on a campaign.
I think many women are drawn to finance careers because
the hours for fundraising are significantly more predictable. Low level
field work is popular for both men and women, but
the hours are insane and very few people can continue
(42:44):
with that lifestyle for very long. I think many women
choose to shift tracks because they want a career with
more work life balance, or one that will allow them
to have a family more easily, which is probably why
many women choose not to pursue top level field jobs
in strategy positions. However, that does not mean the finance
positions are inferior to the high level field positions. I've
(43:06):
only ever worked on Democrats campaigns. But that's my two
cents based on my experience. Well, Lauren, thank you so much.
And I would say that wasn't two cents, that was
that was a whole nickel um, So thanks so much
for sharing your experience with us. And I have a
letter here from Nicole in response to our Librarian episode
(43:27):
in which we mentioned the division between women who went
into teaching and women who went into librarianship. She says, hello,
literally writing on my phone while on the treadmill, Nicole,
that is dangerous. I hope you stopped. Uh, she says,
you talked about ye only public schools being quote kind
of intent sometimes because there were quote untrained women teachers
(43:50):
coming in with students of all ages who were sometimes
larger and taller, and it could be physically exacting to
manage a classroom. Hello. Hello, Hello, Uh, this is still
how opening today. I was a public school teacher in
Baltimore City in Washington, d C. For seven years. Several
things to comment on. One, I am five too, and
students were often taller than I was, even when I
(44:11):
taught middle school. When I taught high school, I was
often the shortest person in the room. Two. Untrained teachers
are still common, particularly in the urban schools where I taught.
Alternative certification programs think Teach for America provide large numbers
of women teachers with a summer's worth of training. Let
me tell you not enough. I was alternatively certified, so
(44:33):
I'm not against these programs totally, but they do place
under trained teachers in high needs classrooms in higher performing schools.
Kids in one class are typically the same age. That's
not a guarantee in urban schools. One year I taught
kids in the same class who arranged an age from
twelve to sixteen. High rates of retention, particularly among black students,
make urban classrooms highly diverse, and even if students are
(44:56):
the same age, the range of academic abilities is staggering.
It is physically exhausting, and remain that way the entire
seven years I taught four As for quote, breathing that
bad air of those stifled classrooms and listeners. She's referring
to the efforts to get more women into librarianship by
convincing them that you won't be so stifled in these
(45:19):
classrooms and it's you know, less, physically exacting work to
be a librarian. Nicole says, my very first classroom had
two tiny, opaque windows, only one opened, and even then
it opened inward six inches. Talk about a stifled classroom.
None of my classrooms in d C had windows that opened,
but they were Florida ceilings, so at least I got sunshine.
(45:41):
Kind of a long email, but I just wanted to
point out that many teachers are still dealing with difficult
situations every day as they do the hard work of
educating our youth. Thanks for the great content. I look
forward to future episodes, and thanks for the insight, Nicole,
and thanks to everybody who's written into us. Mom Stuff
at how stuff Works dot com is our email address
and for links all of our social media as well
(46:02):
as all of our blogs, videos and podcasts with our
sources so you can learn more about second wave feminism.
And now head on over to stuff Mom Never Told
You dot com for more on this and thousands of
other topics. Is it how stuff works? Dot com
Welcome to Stuff Mom Never Told You from how Stuff
Works dot Com. Hello, and welcome to the podcast. I'm
Kristin and I'm Caroline, and welcome back to Part two
of Now and Then, which Caroline, I'm gonna admit it,
I did name these episodes after the classic movie Now
(00:24):
and Then about childhood girl friendships. I think I mean
that's applicable to talk about the feminist movement. Uh. We
we get images going back into these girls past and
they were growing up, and then we flash forward to
see where they are in the present. And we're kind
of doing that with our conversation with Terry, looking into
(00:45):
now's past and then going forward and looking at where
they are and where they're going, and to extend are
now and then metaphor just one one step farther. You know,
the story is about all these these girls with different personalities,
because of course you have to have that for an
On Thomble comedy. That's enjoyable, cam Um, and this part
(01:09):
two episode picking up as the women's liberal ration movement
is really coming into its own. We are starting to
see what happens when we have kind of a clash
of personalities, when we have a lot of different women
from a lot of different backgrounds and with a lot
of different ideas in the same room, and the trouble
(01:30):
that can arise specifically when the woman in the front
of that room starts to get paranoid about lesbian interlopers. Essentially, yeah,
I think I think this example has ceased to be hypothetical,
and we we are specifically talking about Betty for Dan.
Oh yeah, we're no longer and now and then no
Christina Ricci and Rosie o'donald far away, We're talking about
(01:54):
Betty for Dan. Um. And as we teased to at
the end of the last episode, UM, this moment in
the late sixties and early seventies where Betty for Dan
is kind of escorted to the side, UM is a
really important moment that deserves more attention and understanding of
(02:18):
ours as millennial feminist. Because the standard line is, oh, well,
National Organization for Women try to kick call it's lesbians
out at one point, so well, you know, they must
be terrible. And while there is a grain of truth
to that, Terry O'Neill, who is the current president of
the National Organization for Women, has some very helpful nuance
(02:40):
to add to also give some insight as to how
Betty for Dan's homophobia um affected people within the organization
and like what they think about that today. Yeah, so
let's hear what she had to say in terms of
that nuance. You know, I'm Betty for Dan did lasting
lasting damn to the organization because of her attitude. It
(03:03):
wasn't just that one phrase, although the phrase it's just
it's just horrible, but it was truly her belief that
we would not get that. She had this hierarchical um view.
She came quite frankly, she came out of economic justice
labor movement and which to this day remains unfortunately hierarchical
(03:23):
sort of our our issues first, and then we will
come back and get your issues. And that was the
way Betty fer Dan approached it um and then and
and and shockingly to me, she says us and them
when she's talking about women. I mean, the last time
I checked, lesbians are women. In any event, she did
do last thing damage in nineteen seventy one, her her
(03:46):
view was soundly defeated, soundly defeated within the organization. Nineteen
seventy one, that is when the organization adopted clear policy
that lesbians are women and lesbian rights are one of
our core a shoe areas. So uh forty five out
of our fifty years we have had lesbian rights. Of course,
it eventually grew to LGBT now it's lgbt q I
(04:08):
a uh full civil and human rights. But that but
but she did lose, and it was a it was
an organization wide conversation and her view was defeated. So
also going on during this time, though, you've got the
strike free Quality. On August seventy we get this huge
(04:29):
strike free Quality that signals basically the start of the
women's lib movement and attracts a ton of women to
local NOW chapters. So the strike was intended to commemorate
the fiftieth anniversary of the nineteenth Amendment and also call
for three main things, abortion demand, twenty four hour child
(04:49):
care centers, and equal education and employment opportunities for women.
Major three major ways to be able to control your life,
be able to say what you how you want to
live your life. Yeah, and one really fascinating like byproduct
of the strike was that it attracted a lot of housewives,
(05:11):
you know, women who were in those local chapters of
NOW who would probably see the New York organization and say,
you know that's not for me. I'm not in Manhattan.
I'm like Susie in Kansas, and I've got three kids,
and I do feel oppressed, but I don't know what
to do about it. And then the strike happens and
gets all this media attention and they're like, oh, there's
(05:33):
a chapter here, I can get involved. And in the
same way as those younger activists out of the Civil
rights movement brought consciousness raising to the organization, these new
or more suburban now members were more into things like
correcting media images of women and gender stereotyping in children's books,
(05:56):
which makes sense, you know, meet people where they're at. Uh,
there're folks more on those kinds of things that they
immediately identified with versus fixing job discrimination. We'll see. I mean,
I love when we hit on these very clear examples
in so many of our episodes, where it's clearly so
important to have people with a diverse set of backgrounds
(06:17):
and viewpoints and life experiences and sure absolutely diversity in
race and ethnicity, diversity and age, but also, like I said,
just diversity in life experience, because what a great idea
to tackle the children's book stereotype. Yeah, I mean a
very basic thing that probably, you know, a radical feminist
(06:38):
in Brooklyn might not be as focused on, and not
because she is not as good of a feminist, um,
but simply because, like you said, it's all about those
you know, personal connections to things that are relevant to you.
It's all about following that anger. Really. I mean, I'm
kind of into that tactic personally, although sometimes following my
anger means I just need to eat. Oh yeah, blood
(07:01):
sugar is getting real low. Sure. Yeah, But by nineteen
seventy four, Now has really come into its own. In
addition to expanding its platforms to encompass lesbians, it's also
passed the resolution to focus more on women of color
and address racism within the organization itself. And there are
(07:22):
more than forty thousand members at this point in a
thousand chapters across the country. That's not small potatoes, I know.
So this thing is, I mean this, I know, feminism is,
it's happening. It's happening. So as NOW is growing, it's
attracting all of those thousands of members across the entire country.
(07:43):
A diversity of viewpoints, a diversity of backgrounds, we start
to see sort of this delicate and and challenging balancing
act that's happening between legitimizing a hierarchy in the organization
but also balancing that against participant tory angry and rightfully
so membership. Yeah, because you have this formal, top down
(08:07):
structure with local grassroots chapters at the bottom, and that
structure kind of hampered diversity initially and kind of led
to some of those schisms that we mentioned um and
a lot of it's the organization's growth also led to
(08:28):
organizational problems because there really wasn't a middle structure between
you know, National Now and these local chapters. But those
local chapters really just thrived on anger probably and and
enthusiasm because you have local Now activists who would create
their own packets on effective lobbying, filing discrimination suits, contacting
(08:52):
the media, things about sexist imagery, you know, because they
did not have websites and and Google Shared drive, you know,
where you could set up, you know, a standard packet
for everyone, so they were just doing it on their own,
kind of passing along these tactics analog style. But Okay,
when you said enthusiasm, I can't help it, but I
(09:15):
immediately picture you know, those like college banners theople can wave.
I immediately picture like a crowd of wildly enthusiastic women
waving those little collegiate banners that say angry and and
feminist and and and I just and then I like
went off on a tangent my brain about how I
want those banners, like a pennant and angry feminist, an
(09:37):
angry feminist penn And maybe it's as angry on one
side and feminist on the other, and you can just
wave them back and forth, love it, scream for an
end of the wage gap. I would get on public
transit with that. I would get in every crowded elevator
that I see. Um, yes, someone someone on Etsy? Can
you get on that? If someone hasn't already made of um?
(10:00):
And One thing kind of peculiar about Now was that
the leaders were experts in law, media and politics, as
we mentioned, but they were not experts in movement making.
I mean, at the beginning, Betty for Dan's vision for
Now was to make it a relatively small and exclusive
(10:21):
group of influencers. Essentially, you know, like you said a
while back, like she kind of hand picked these women
at the top of their fields, like the most brilliant
feminist women that she knew, with the goal of what
just having them with the goal of influencing politics and policy. Yeah,
so not necessarily doing all of that organizing and angry
(10:42):
Pennant waving exactly. I guarantee you Betty for Dan was
not thinking about like sexist imagery in children's books when
she wanted to start this um. And the thing is,
regardless of what your organizational goal is, when you have
a massively diverse and geographically scattered group of people and
(11:04):
identities and politics under the same umbrella, you're gonna have challenges.
You're probably gonna have some schisms. I mean, these are
just natural byproducts I think of of an organization that
is succeeding. So I think some of the side eye
that now has received is really unfounded because it's, I
(11:26):
don't know, it's almost like we have expected feminists to
be too perfect in a way, you know, to not
have disagreements and to not be you know, and not
to have prejudices as well. Sure, yeah, I know. And
and as much as we want our feminist leaders from
(11:47):
whatever group to be these perfect, amazing, upstanding humans, we're
all imperfect. I mean, that's part of the work, right,
That's part of the work is uncovering our bias, is
in our prejudices and rooting them out so we can
work for a greater good. Well, And that's and that's
one of the stunning things looking at this early history
(12:08):
is how swiftly this increasingly diverse group of women evolved
in terms of their platforms and kind of holding themselves
accountable to their own privileges and prejudices. But at the beginning,
you know, it probably did not look like an organization
(12:29):
that would survive for fifty years because you have a
lot of second wave groups meanwhile that we're flaming up
and flaming out really quickly. So that's a big question too,
Like what has been the staying power of the National
Organization for Women. I mean, you've got anger. Anger is
(12:50):
pretty powerful UM and the whole thing of making the
personal political. But Terry O'Neil really attributes it to the
power of grassroots organizing. I think the reason now has
survived for long UM is a because we have remained
grassroots and driven by the grassroots. I can tell you
(13:10):
that it will doing and running an organization that way
will make you old before your time. But it gives
such power to the grass rooms. And we have two
and thirty active chapters and action teams as we're calling
them around the country, all of which you're autonomous. They
do not take their orders from National They they they
(13:32):
National Now. The president of National Now speaks for the
national organization. Each chapter president speaks for her organization. They
decide on their own policies and programs. Obviously they can't
they can't violate National Now policy, but beyond that, they
are autonomous and that has proved to be to to
to really be sort of the backbone of resiliency for
(13:54):
the organization. The other piece I think that has kept
us UM viable is precisely the multi issue our dedication
to multi issues, and it is not just our our
dedication to these multiple issues, but it's our very clear
policy that we are not permitted to elevate one issue
(14:16):
over another. We have removed individuals from leadership UM in
the organization who tried to elevate one issue over another.
We are very clear that that is not how you
get equality for women and Now is more than just
grassroots organizing or angry pennant waving I mean, there are
some very real, concrete accomplishments and successes that they've been
(14:38):
able to usher in. Yeah, and probably successes that folks
aren't aware of. So of course, UM we asked Harry
to share some of her success stories. Well, let's see, first,
let's just talk about the first thing that occurs to me.
Of course, I'm going to go right back to the elections,
because that's where my head is. But but UM NOW
(14:59):
was one of organizations that early on created a political
action committee and the focus was to elect more feminist
women to office. And we have always, UH, the pack
has always endorsed men as well as women. We endorse
on issues UM exclusively. We do have a rule if
you have a man running against a woman and they
(15:21):
are both equally qualified, equally endorsable, then we do endorse
the women. That's a rare occurrence, UM. But anyway, so,
so one of the biggest UH successes that I think
we've had is the election of more and more and
more women to office, both at the state level and
in Congress. I mean, when NOW started out in nineteen sixty,
(15:42):
there were hardly any women in the United States Congress.
Today it's only it's not nearly enough. But we also
have Hillary Clinton running for president, and we have we
are building a bench of women leaders uh that will
come after Hillary Clinton and run for president and run
for governor of various states and so forth. So that's
(16:04):
I think a huge win. Another huge win that we had.
And this is this is something that I think a
lot of people don't know the history of it, and
it is it is one of the most uh for me, wrenching.
It's the wrenching when and that is the Violence Against
Women Act. Now I can tell you that after the
Violence Against Women Act was passed in the nineteen mid
(16:25):
nineteen nineties, incidents of domestic violence, homicide dropped, precipitously, absolutely dropped, precipitously.
Violence Against Women Act simply provides the programs and funding
UH for intimate partner violence to stop it and also
to respond to it, um and in a way that
is victims centered. That was new in the mid nineteen nineties.
(16:47):
Why do I say it was wrenching. It was wrenching
because the political process in the ninety nineties, if you
recall Newt Gingrich was what was in charge of the
House UM and I need to uh NU Gingbridge was
certainly very much a leader at the time. There was
all these very conservative legislators in both the House and
(17:10):
the Senate UM and the compromise it was made was
to have the UM the Omnibus Crime Bill was passed,
and the Violence Against Women Act was part of that
Omnibus Crime Bill. And the Omnibus Crime Bill provided lots
of money for training police and prosecutors and judges around
(17:34):
domestic violence and intimate partner violence. But it also created
an enormous amount of money for community policing, which has
over the years been perverted into stop and frisk right
and in and later on in subsequent UM years, the
US military frankly began dumping a lot of its material
(17:56):
into local police forces. And so with this community policing
now becomes community occupation in many communities and anyway. But
but but quite frankly, UH, freeing women, giving women tools
to UH to leave intimate partner violence has been quite revolutionary.
(18:17):
So that was that was the second huge win that
we had, and I would say the third win that
we had was really driven by now and an organization
called Legal Momentum UH, which is which does litigation for
women's rights UH. We sued, We brought a racketeering suit
against extremist organizations that were blockading abortion clinics and UH
(18:40):
and and threatening violence against abortion providers and just we're
really is again. This was in the late ninety nines.
I think we filed the lawsuit, we won a nationwide
injunction as a result of which attacks on abortion clinics
plummeted by more than eighty percent UM. That was a
huge win during the During the time that litigation was
(19:03):
going on, we also were able to pass the Freedom
of what is the freedom of Access to clinic entrances,
the FACE Act, which essentially makes it a federal crime
to block clinic entrances. It doesn't mean that they can't
still harass providers. They clearly are doing that. Um. But
our our efforts to stop the violence against UH clinics
(19:25):
had huge impact and really really was very helpful. Caroline,
as a person who has periods and the host of
stuff I never told you, I am delighted to promote Lola,
which is a startup founded by women for women, all
(19:47):
about tampons. I mean, is there anything smintier than that?
That's pretty sminty. And the great thing about these tampons.
Is that Yeah. Not only is it coming out of
this great women driven company, but these tampons that they've
created are one natural and therefore easy to feel good about.
(20:08):
Unlike a lot of those major tampon brands out there,
Lola offers complete transparency about the ingredients that are in
their tampons. They are one cotton with no at A chemicals, fragrances, synthetics,
or dies, and Lola is customizable. You can choose your
(20:28):
preferred assortment of eighteen, light, regular, or Super tampons. You
can also decide how many boxes you'd like delivered right
to your door and select your shipment frequency. You can cancel,
skip in order or modify your subscription at any time.
Lola will email you two days before your boxes ship,
(20:50):
and they pride themselves on no surprises or gimmicks, which, really,
if we're talking about menstruation, it's great that there are
no surprises or gimmicks here. You can wear all the
white pants you want, yes, so thank you for that,
Lola and listeners. Of course, we have a special deal
for you for sixty percent off your first Lola order.
(21:12):
Visit my Lola dot com and enter mom Stuff when
you subscribe. That's right, and don't forget for six off
that first order. Go to my lola dot com and
enter code mom stuff. And now back to the show.
(21:32):
And of course there are initiatives that the National Organization
for Women has not been able to see through. Muriel Fox,
when she was talking to Time magazine in June, highlighted
the issue of childcare for women. I mean that is
still a massive, perpetual problem problem. Yeah, especially in the
(21:53):
United States. Um. She also highlighted the emphasis on end
of visual rather than institutional change. A lah Lean in
that our kind of popular feminist mantras can over focus on, right,
the idea being we do still need to band together,
(22:17):
we need each other, we still need this grassroots organizing.
We can't all be expected to like bootstrap it. And
just the focus on the individual leaning in is not
the answer in every situation, right. I mean, our workplaces
should be held accountable to change as well. Um. And
she's also very frustrated by the constant likability penalty that
(22:42):
ambitious women face. Oh yeah, and I mean obviously Hillary
Clinton being like a one example of this whole likability penalty.
But there's another issue that we're going to devote a
podcast too in the future. Which is the Equal Rights
Amendment UM that I asked Terry about specifically A because UM,
(23:07):
I'm I wanted to learn more about it, partially for
selfish reasons because we're going to do a podcast on
it in the future, UM, but also because it's this
piece of legislation that is such a no brainer in
so many ways, and yet was stymied. And Terry fills
(23:30):
us in on the whole background of the Equal Rights Amendment.
If you're not aware of what it is, that is
one of the most fascinating stories. So women win the
vote in nineteen twenty and immediately Alice Paul, who was
one of the major um leaders of the fight for
women's suffrage, immediately right the next document that she wants
(23:52):
to pass, which is the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution.
She wrote it in the nineteen twenties. It was it
was submitted to Congress repeatedly in Congress after Congress after Congress.
In nineteen seventy two, finally Congress passes UH the proposed
Equal Rights Amendment, which simply says equality of rights under
the law shall not be abridged on account of sex
(24:14):
so that's nineteen seventy two. The only way they're able
to get it passed is they they stuck on a
originally a seven year then it became a ten year
um time limit. Only if thirty five states ratify within
the within ten years, then the e r A becomes
part of the constitution. In the early going, the e
(24:34):
r A caught on like wildfire. Was it was by
nineteen seventy six. I believe it was by nineteen seventy six,
and the thing comes out of Congress in seventy two,
and I think that by nineteen seventy six fully thirty
five states had already ratified. Then comes the backlash. The
Catholic Church, a lot of the chambers of commerce and
the commercial world. The business community was viciously app to
(25:00):
the Equal Rights Amendment for reasons I have never understood,
but they put huge resources into stopping it. The the
the so Elinor Smil, who at the time was the
president of of the National Organization for Women, decided that
that now had to make the e r A a huge,
huge issue, one less push, Let's get all of those
(25:21):
thirty eight states ratified. So she created a nationwide action
campaign that was years long. It was remarkable, it was galvanizing,
it was UH. It was just this huge, huge effort. UM.
Ultimately we fell three vote, three states short of ratification. UM.
(25:43):
Some people at the time said that the r A
was dead. It turns out it was stalled. It was
not dead. It's it's stalled. We we believe that the
ten year UH time limit with bogus and UH and
and not effective. So we are still working to pass
to ratify the e r A with three three more states.
But here's the amazing part of what happened, that huge
(26:04):
movement with men and women supporting the Equal Rights Amendment.
Even though we failed to get those last three states
to ratify it, it absolutely sparked a sea change in
people's attitudes. So n two comes and those of those
last three states have not ratified the amendment. Then by
(26:29):
the end of the nineteen nineties, the surveys are showing
that huge majorities, I'm talking eightieso odd percent of men,
nineties odd percent of women are all saying that women
should have equality and that it should be in the constitution.
And se of them now say it already is in
the constitution. So you have to ask yourself What did
(26:51):
those women do in the nineteen eighties after the e
r A failed to get those three votes? What was
going on? It was absolutely remarkable. They remained active, they
remain determined to achieve equality, and in fact, because they
had such huge public support, overwhelming public support for the
(27:15):
concept of women's equality, they were able to move forward,
um in huge numbers. Ten years after two comes two, right,
that is the year that huge numbers of women get
elected to Congress. So it was you just can't call
it a defeat when you look at what happened afterwards.
(27:35):
It was the leaders of the leaders of the movement,
It was the leaders of NOW, it was the leaders
of other women's organizations saw that there was all this
energy and UH and they used it UH and they
handled it into making more games in other ways. But
if for some reason you're not as deeply interested in
the r A as we are and thinking that the
(27:56):
fight for for the e r A is as old news, um,
I mean, we have to emphasize the fact that NOW
is very much still active in pushing for institutional change
and is massively and has been massively influential UH in
the legal arena as well, especially when it comes to
(28:18):
protecting and expanding women's rights. And along those lines, Kristen,
you asked her about the Stanford rape case and the
whole campaign that rose up around it to get the
judge on that case recalled. I think it's important to
recall this judge. I am so grateful to Professor Michelle
Dauber at Stanford who is leading the recall case and UH,
(28:42):
and I hope your listeners will go will go to
recall Aaron Persky dot com or recall Judge Persky dot com.
Both of those go to Professor Dauber's website that she
has set up. This is going to be a costly effort,
but I think it's possible to get that man off
the bench entirely, not relying on him to be to resign,
(29:04):
but we are. But I think that the voters out
in California need to take him out um of that position.
He doesn't belong on the bench. And I think that
this is going to have huge repercussions because it's going
to prove that we can do something that collectively, we
who care about UH sexual assault, we can actually take
action that is impactful. It will UM. I think it
(29:28):
is now part of the growing movement to stop rape
on campus UM, which is also quite frankly, a movement
to stop rape in the military, and it's a movement
to UM to end UH and trafficking girls in middle
school and high school. It's a different type of issue,
but sexual assault and sexual violence I think are becoming
(29:51):
UM important issues nationwide. And I hope the recalling Judge
Persky can be a huge step towards signaling to all
of the other judges out there that it is not
okay to somehow justify a vicious a vicious felony because
a young man also knows how to swim and is white.
So and I don't think you can you can eliminate
(30:12):
the racial aspect of this. Uh. Just think what might
have happened if the perpetrator had not been right and
had not been a star athlete. So so that's that's
part of it. UM. I also think that UM, I
think it's very important because I had this conversation with
with a number of people the other day, and uh,
(30:35):
you know, there are two systems of law that exist
that are relevant to sexual trauma and sexual assault. One
is our criminal justice system. And the criminal justice system
does not put the victim at the center of its concern.
In fact, it's the state versus perpetrator, it's not victim
(30:55):
versus perpetrators. So that you've got the criminal justice system
where the commune of the itself has been offended and
is putting this criminal away. Then you have Title nine
on college campuses, which exists to ensure that every um
woman gets an equal educational opportunity, and that would include
victims of sexual assault. So colleges have an obligation to
(31:17):
ensure the equal educational opportunity of all of their students,
that that that the equal educational opportunity is not served
if all you do is turn this guy over to
the police. Of course, you have to turn a rapist
over the over to the police. But in addition, schools
have an obligation to ensure that the victim received a
(31:38):
fully equal education. To me, all that says that the
National Organization for Women is not to be taken for
granted and is still incredibly relevant. Um. Along those same lines,
one thing that I definitely wanted to ask Terry about
(31:59):
in terms of taining their relevance is how she sees
activism intersecting with technology and social media, because obviously, you know,
they likely said there was no Google share Drive, there
was no Twitter back in the day when all everything
was getting off the ground. So it's also been really
(32:23):
crucial for the organization to remain current in terms of
how we communicate with each other and you know, publicize
feminist platforms to the world at large and listen, Terry
thinks that social media is terrific specifically for intersectionality. Digital
(32:46):
activism has actually grown to be a really key part
of grass eas Active Graphs organizing. For now UM I
will tell you that many of our chapters do an
enormous amount of their organizing through Facebook because it's a
very friendly platform for doing things. It is no longer
the case that most women can travel long distances to
(33:07):
go to a monthly chapter meeting. Many do. Many have
virtual meetings of their chapters instead, So utilizing the online
tools is huge. And of course UM pushing your message
out by social media and following your allies and understanding
what their messages has been a key part of being
(33:27):
able to respond quickly, so a rapid response to things
that are going on. In fact, it was it was
the New York City Now Chapter president who actually UM
contacted me and said, how about if you and California
Now and I all put together this letter about Judge Persky.
And I said, Wow, Sonia, if you could do that,
(33:47):
I would be forever grateful. So she took the lead
on it. UM the Um. The existence of social media,
I think is huge. I think something else is happening
and I and I know it's has happened for me
UM and for many of the NOW leaders that I
interact with, and I'm hoping that it permeates throughout the
(34:08):
entire organization. And it's this. Some of the most eloquent
and and active individuals on Twitter are African American women.
It just so happens that the most reliably progressive voters
in our country right now as a group are African
American women. I think that social media has given feminists,
(34:32):
particularly anti racist feminists, an opportunity to interact with these
amazing women and to learn from these amazing women, and
to have their understanding of the feminist agenda deeply informed
by these amazing African American women and Latinas and Latino
Xes who are who are all on social media, and
(34:53):
so I think that that is broadening and deepening our
understanding of what the feminist agenda is all about. Well,
so speaking of current with digital activism and remaining relevant
through things like social media, you know, we wanted to
know what the future holds for this very important grassroots
organization now that it's fifty, Now that it's reached I
(35:15):
guess middle age, Well, what does the future hold well?
For one thing, the Equal Rights Amendment Round two around Basilian,
if you count all of the initiatives to get it
past now is at the moment formulating a national action
campaign around an intersectional interpretation of the e r A.
(35:39):
Not only do we want to ratify the e r A,
we want to make sure that the r A is
relevant for immigrant women, that it's relevant for African American women,
that it's relevant for pregnant women and relevant for women
who don't want to get pregnant, That it's relevant for
lesbians and transgender women and the entire lgbt q i
A community. We're we're going to be rolling stuff out
(36:00):
and it's one of the most exciting parts to me
of the e r A. UM. I keep hearing the
critique that it's only about gender, but I don't believe that.
I think that if we had any r A, for example,
we could force a change in the immigration laws, which currently,
if you look at them, they are very skewed against
immigrant women. Um. So it is not the case that
(36:24):
you can't be intersectional with the e r A. So
we're starting that project, which I'm very excited about. But
Caroline Terry all around is just super pumped to be
doing the work of now right now. Yeah. I mean
I mentioned this at the very beginning that she did
her fist pump as she was passionately talking with Kristen
(36:47):
and me and how I just think she's fabulous and
it's so obvious, and I hope it's obvious having heard
the interview with her, I hope it's obvious how passionate
and excited she is to be doing this work. Yeah. Well,
her and and all of the people that we saw
and that we met at the conference. Um, which really
(37:09):
it's for me at least, it really deepened my understanding
of the movement at large, because I mean, you have
you had women who were there from the mid sixties
who are still working at today who are still angry
covered in now button buttons. Decades of button listen now
has button swag nailed that button game. Who it is
(37:32):
on point? They slay those buttons. What excites me the
most is this moment that we're in. Look, just go
figure you've got and you've got a woman who was
proudly feminist, um, who has run a campaign of inclusivity
on issues and an inclusive campaign but specifically on the
shoes all right, running as the Democratic nominee for President
(37:55):
of the United States of America. And you have a demagogue,
a deeply misogynistic, racist, xenophobic demagogue running against her. You
could not have a more stark, I think, um description
(38:16):
of exactly what this what this country is struggling with, right,
we are struggling with. I I do view Hillary Clinton's
candidacy as our opportunity to make a clean break with
our racist and sexist and homophobic past and and to
reject Donald Trump as the epitome of what we don't
(38:37):
like about America's history, and to and to move forward
with with with with a real promise of equality for
all the different communities that are that are that make
up this country. Yeah. Well, thank you so so much
(39:02):
to Terry O'Neil for talking to us, giving us her
time and also to the organization for having us at
the conference. Um, we were truly honored to go and listeners,
Hopefully this has been as informative and helpful of a
history lesson for you as it has been for us. Yeah.
(39:24):
And if I mean, if we if this episode and
the conversation with Terry can play a role in reducing
some of those generational gaps and misunderstandings, UM, I will
be super pleased. I think you know, there will always
be divisions and how people of different ages, backgrounds, whatever,
see the world. But if we can help bridge that
(39:46):
chasm of misunderstanding, uh, to show that the women of
now and the second Waivers were not across the board
one entity. Yeah, I mean, and it's just so there's
just so much that we today as millennial feminists, however
you want to identify yourself. There's so much that we
have to learn from that period in time about how
(40:11):
things were not so long ago and how much things
have changed, and that we are should not take any
of it for granted. Um, but also how much certain
things have not changed, and how we do need to
stay angry and keep following that anger and wave our
angry feminist penance and If you want to learn more
(40:31):
about now and or get involved, you can head over
to their website at now dot org. And we'd love
to hear from you about everything that we've been talking
about today and everything that Terry shared with us. Mom
Stuff at how Stuff works dot com is our email address.
You can also tweet us at Mom's Stuff podcast or
(40:54):
messages on Facebook, and we've got a couple of messages
to share with you right now. So I have a
letter here from Lauren on our Women in Political Campaigning
episode from a little while back, and Lauren writes, I'm
a twenty two year old recent college graduate who's working
(41:16):
as a political fundraiser in d C for a mid
sized trade association. In college, I worked in several roles
on my home representatives campaigns, including as an intern and
later as a field organizer. In both campaign cycles, my
REPS chief of staff was a woman, and the majority
of staff at all levels were women. While I recognize
(41:36):
that this is true for a minority of campaigns, I
think my ability to work in an almost entirely female
campaign environment gave me the confidence that I could hold
any position in a campaign office that I wanted. I
think you missed the mark slightly in what seemed to
be your suggestion that fundraising jobs are less prestigious and
not outward facing in campaigns, while they aren't in the
(41:59):
same war room, and as serily, finance directors are almost
always included in all high level meetings. After all, no
strategy can be implemented if you don't have the funds
to back it up. Finance directors are counted on to
know how much money is currently in the bank, what
the day to day cost of operating the campaign is,
and how much campaign can be expected to raise as
the cycle continues. While a low level fundraiser might stay
(42:22):
in the office and make arrangements for the next event
or make invitations. I think that fundraising jobs are frequently
some of the most outward facing jobs on a campaign.
I think many women are drawn to finance careers because
the hours for fundraising are significantly more predictable. Low level
field work is popular for both men and women, but
the hours are insane and very few people can continue
(42:44):
with that lifestyle for very long. I think many women
choose to shift tracks because they want a career with
more work life balance, or one that will allow them
to have a family more easily, which is probably why
many women choose not to pursue top level field jobs
in strategy positions. However, that does not mean the finance
positions are inferior to the high level field positions. I've
(43:06):
only ever worked on Democrats campaigns. But that's my two
cents based on my experience. Well, Lauren, thank you so much.
And I would say that wasn't two cents, that was
that was a whole nickel um, So thanks so much
for sharing your experience with us. And I have a
letter here from Nicole in response to our Librarian episode
(43:27):
in which we mentioned the division between women who went
into teaching and women who went into librarianship. She says, hello,
literally writing on my phone while on the treadmill, Nicole,
that is dangerous. I hope you stopped. Uh, she says,
you talked about ye only public schools being quote kind
of intent sometimes because there were quote untrained women teachers
(43:50):
coming in with students of all ages who were sometimes
larger and taller, and it could be physically exacting to
manage a classroom. Hello. Hello, Hello, Uh, this is still
how opening today. I was a public school teacher in
Baltimore City in Washington, d C. For seven years. Several
things to comment on. One, I am five too, and
students were often taller than I was, even when I
(44:11):
taught middle school. When I taught high school, I was
often the shortest person in the room. Two. Untrained teachers
are still common, particularly in the urban schools where I taught.
Alternative certification programs think Teach for America provide large numbers
of women teachers with a summer's worth of training. Let
me tell you not enough. I was alternatively certified, so
(44:33):
I'm not against these programs totally, but they do place
under trained teachers in high needs classrooms in higher performing schools.
Kids in one class are typically the same age. That's
not a guarantee in urban schools. One year I taught
kids in the same class who arranged an age from
twelve to sixteen. High rates of retention, particularly among black students,
make urban classrooms highly diverse, and even if students are
(44:56):
the same age, the range of academic abilities is staggering.
It is physically exhausting, and remain that way the entire
seven years I taught four As for quote, breathing that
bad air of those stifled classrooms and listeners. She's referring
to the efforts to get more women into librarianship by
convincing them that you won't be so stifled in these
(45:19):
classrooms and it's you know, less, physically exacting work to
be a librarian. Nicole says, my very first classroom had
two tiny, opaque windows, only one opened, and even then
it opened inward six inches. Talk about a stifled classroom.
None of my classrooms in d C had windows that opened,
but they were Florida ceilings, so at least I got sunshine.
(45:41):
Kind of a long email, but I just wanted to
point out that many teachers are still dealing with difficult
situations every day as they do the hard work of
educating our youth. Thanks for the great content. I look
forward to future episodes, and thanks for the insight, Nicole,
and thanks to everybody who's written into us. Mom Stuff
at how stuff Works dot com is our email address
and for links all of our social media as well
(46:02):
as all of our blogs, videos and podcasts with our
sources so you can learn more about second wave feminism.
And now head on over to stuff Mom Never Told
You dot com for more on this and thousands of
other topics. Is it how stuff works? Dot com
Stuff Mom Never Told You News
Hosts And Creators
Anney Reese
Samantha McVey
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.