University of Utah Student Newspapers | 2013-02-04 | Page 5

www.dailyutahchronicle.corn 5 OPINION Monday February 4, 2013 Women's liberation continues today Resource Center a catalystforfemale advancement T he Women's Resource Center at the U is a catalyst for releasing women from traditional Old English subservience to their platform of excellence and empowerment. Beginning with a greeting exuding positive energy, the women from the WRC present themselves with confidence and strength. I went into the WRC out of curiosity, and came out knowing I wanted to feel like the women there feel. I also knew that I had found the perfect place for assistance and encouragement in gaining my full potential. The WRC came into existence in 1971, and offers an array of services including helping women return to school, counseling on an independent basis, offering nontraditional scholarships and advancing career goals for single parents. The graduation rate for women in Utah is the lowest in the nation. Women, especially women of color, are rendered invisible in the decision processes of our state Legislature. Perhaps with the exceptional work and effort given at the WRC, we will someday see a woman in Utah take a national Congressional seat. Unlike the old-school "gentleman's clubs," which ostracize women by canonizing principles such as Freemasonry and religious hierarchy, the WRC does not reject men. Men can apply for the same services. Being raised in Utah during the 197os and '8os, I watched the rise in female power from a distance. The majority of Utah's young women, as with many across the nation, were saddled with the text "Fascinating Womanhood" and were forced to take high school courses in home ROSE JONES Opinion Columnist economics — in other words, women were given housewife instruction, and discouraged from pursuing professional careers. But even in apron-clad times, the advances of heroes such as Gloria Steinem and her Ms. Magazine crept into our bedrooms. Betty Friedan's "The Feminine Mystique" guaranteed at least four months of girlfriend sleepovers reading about empowerment. The same book caused many fretful brows on male church leaders. Moreover, we learned that there was a world beyond Utah from courageous publications written by women such as Maya Angelou, who worked closely and took many risks to get out the message of equality driven by Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. Oprah Winfrey's iconic vision has empowered women for decades. A hundred years ago, Alice Paul and Lucy Burns began the fight for American women's voting rights, and in 1920 the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution ensured it. But it is nothing to celebrate, really, because the 12th Amendment ruled that the "electors," gender neutral, should vote in their states for the president of the United States. So women as a necessary part of "We the People" should have begun in 1803. The dominant white man ruling culture in America has brought us gC11114 \\5 a ° SALLY YOO/The Daily Utah Chronicle to near collapse. We had a Revolutionary War to escape the royal ironhandedness, but it seems we failed to remove the queen Victorian women's repressive policies from the New World. For 200 years, such policies have spawned a battle against constitutional women's rights such as abortion and birth control. Laws championed by brave women such Qualified women advance on battlefield but not in diplomacy T he decision to open all ground combat positions to qualified women is the latest chapter in the discussion on women's equal opportunity in the workplace. But forget whether women deserve equal opportunities to fight in wars — we need to address their opportunities to work for peace. The ranks of official peace work remain dramatically male dominated. It used to be that a woman's role in diplomacy was limited to her role as a diplomat's wife. She represented America by hosting teas and socializing amiably with her foreign counterparts. Since the State Department began admitting women in official roles in 1922, women's progress in the field of diplomacy has been slow. Although Madeleine Albright and Condoleezza Rice have been highprofile negotiators, women remain largely excluded from official peace work. As recently as 1970, only 4.8 percent of U.S. diplomats were women. Today the figure is about i8 percent. As recently as 2004, just 3percent of the United Nations' permanent representatives were women. That's eight female voices involved in UN peace talks. Outside the official realm, Mimi MARSTALLER Opinion Columnist women dominate peace projects that happen at the community level. From Peace X Peace's initiative to increase awareness between Western and Arab societies, to lesbian activist Aishah Shahidah Simmons' film "NO! The Rape Documentary" women champion peace projects in unofficial capacities. Because women's peace work happens at the grassroots level, recognition of their achievements is lacking. Of 85 Nobel peace prize laureates, only 15 are women. In the past 25 years, 4o women have been included as signatories on peace treaties. Perhaps women's proficiency in peace work is a result of their unofficial capacity. Women working as community leaders do not have deep RORY PENMAN/The Daily Utah Chronicle budgets or standing armies. Their limited resources force them to be creative and peaceful, since traditional violent action requires weapons, artillery and intelligence equipment. War, as the last decade has proven, is expensive. The decidedly non-technocratic flavor of women's leadership in peace stems from the community environment. These women leaders are part of their own constituencies and tailor their movement to local factors. Gender studies professor Susie Porter said peacekeeping as an official job might limit the adaptability of peace initiatives. "Is being a leader being in charge, or recognizing leadership strengths in others and delegating to them?" Porter asked. Our official peace talks would benefit from the perspectives of women who work in localized peace efforts and recognize the intricacy of the peace process. Soldiers know their roles are dynamic. Fighting in ground combat is not a skill one can master once and apply universally. Soldiers constantly account for new factors. Peacemaking on the ground is similarly amorphous, and grassroots peaceworkers know it. The Kenyan women who established a home for AIDS orphans are constantly adjusting their program. When new laws demanded students buy their own school uniforms, a common room was converted into a sewing room and a skilled seamstress was called up from the ranks of the women's organization to outfit the children. When shortages of corn left rural regions hungry, the women diverted funds to send food to the children's living relatives. Soon enough, the shrinking U.S. defense budget might bring peaceful solutions into the spotlight. The Pentagon has already cut 46,000 jobs as part of an effort to cut spending before mandatory spending cuts occur this spring. This might be a boon to peaceful solutions. Women's access to all combat roles stands on the argument that they can do what men do — but women's access to peace work can be justified precisely because they do it differently from men. [e-mail] as Margaret Sanger 90 years ago, and Jane Roe 4o years ago, are being ridiculed fiercely. Anti-women obstructionists such as Phyllis Schlafly and Gayle Ruzicka of the regressive Eagle Forum claim women rape themselves. This is the world in which we live, and people such as Schlafly and Ruzicka make the mission of the WRC even more important. It is critical to support the WRC because it is vital for women's academic success, from which empowerment proceeds. We need more female law makers such as Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who said, "Women are the most significant economic engine in the U.S." The WRC is producing such dynamics. [e-mail] Women deserve greater recognition in athletics w omen's sports are undervalued. The little attention centered on equality in sports often goes unnoticed. Perhaps the problem is that professional sports have become an industry. The industry relies upon sponsors and expects to generate exorbitant amounts of money from them — no sponsor means no recognition. The media serve as the tellall. Talk shows and TV networks such as ESPN rarely give a shout-out to women's sports. In an effort to strengthen its credibility in gender equality in sports, ESPN has created a franchise called ESPN W — a channel exclusively for women in sports. The implication, however, is that ESPN is meant to be a men-only sports program. This is most likely not the network's intention, but the consequence is that gender segregation persists not only in sports involvement but in the viewing of sports as well. This matter should be resolved by simply going back to the basics of sports and determining what they really mean. Sports are meant to be fun. Many professional athletes become famous because they love what they do and we, the viewers, love that they love it. However, regardless of whether female professional athletes love what they do, there is a large inequality in the amount of money used to fund men's sports versus women's. This needs to be resolved in order to reach gender equality. In college athletics, for instance, male recruits receive 55 percent of the college scholarships for athletics. The difference might seem negligible, but it still signals unequal recognition and distribution of funds. The female sports of soccer, volleyball and basketball collect 38 percent of money dedicated to college sports. Just 33 percent is spent on the recruitment of new women's athletic programs. In fact, coaches for women's LAUREN KEOGH Opinion Columnist teams earn approximately $850,000 whereas coaches for men's teams receive twice that amount at $1.7 million or more. This pay difference in college sports is most likely indicative of an even greater pay gap in professional sports. The Professional Golfer's Association awards approximately $250 million in prize money, whereas the Ladies' PGA has a shockingly small amount in comparison with only $50 million. The minimum annual wage for a female professional basketball player is $30,000 and the highest is $90,000. For male players, the salary is exceedingly higher, with a minimum earning of $385,000 and a maximum of $15 million annually. Moreover, the percentage of airtime devoted to male professional sports comes out to 96 percent, according to researchers for the Center for Feminist Research at the University of Southern California. Women are, essentially, forgotten. The blame should be placed on networks that don't give viewers a chance to choose between male or female professional sports and only broadcast male sports. Male and female athletes might not be able to play sports together, but female athletes are perhaps more devoted and passionate about their goals. This is probably because they don't have as strong a support group in their audience as men do. Female professional athletes deserve much higher pay than their current earnings because they work just as hard as men to reach their athletic goals. [e-mail]