thecontextofthecoconuttree

[thecontextofthecoconuttree]

The Proud "Damned Lesbian," Roberta Achtenberg

Although Roberta Achtenberg is deeply entrenched as a fairly niche political figure, she has had a tremendous impact on the way we are educated about the LGBTQ+ Community and the way they are treated from court rooms to the Senate floor. I personally don't believe that there can be a discussion about inclusion within American politics without referencing Achtenberg's reception as a Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development nominee.

When Roberta was 27 and going through law school, at the University of Utah, she found herself attracted to a woman. Although she was too scared to discuss these feelings at the time, she researched homosexuality and what it meant to be a lesbian. After reuniting with her husband, they amicably divorced, and Roberta decided to come out exclusively to her family, fearing that revealing her sexuality would jeopardize her career as a lawyer and educator. However, her research exposed the disadvantages at which the LGBTQ+ community were often placed under within the law and issues such as; adoption, privacy rights, marriage, housing, and employment. In 2011, she noted "The fact that sodomy laws existed, and we were therefore criminals; and because we were criminals we were judged mentally deficient and because we were mentally deficient we were expendable... [meaning] we could be fired from our jobs or we could have custody of our children taken away" (Achtenberg, Youtube, 13:42-14:28). At the time, legal and societal prejudice made them vulnerable to losing basic human rights if they were to express their sexuality. These issues inspired her to co-found the National Center for Lesbian Rights in 1977, as well as join the National Lawyers Guild in 1978 and begin working within its Anti-Sexism Committee, which was tasked with creating a manual to help attorneys represent their LGBTQ+ clients, how to address their First Amendment issues, etc. This work resulted in her editing of "Sexual Orientation and the Law" (1985).

As she made her way through different positions, in 1993, she was appointed Assistant Secretary for the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity by President Bill Clinton, making her the first openly LGBTQ person to be appointed and confirmed to a position within a cabinet office. However, this was no easy feat. Conservative groups and Senators, notably Senator Jesse Helms, lobbied against her. In fact, Senator Helms pledged to stall Achtenberg's nomination "for weeks and weeks and weeks" (Helms, UPI), using her sexuality as a central point of attack. In a particularly harsh statement to Times, he referred to her as a "damn lesbian" and an "intolerant radical," framing her nomination as a threat to the future electability of Achtenberg's supportive Senate members. Moreover, the Christian Action Network circulated a video of Achtenberg and her partner riding in a Gay Pride parade in 1992. Helms saw this as further evidence that this was an "insane assault on family values" and chastised her for "demanding that society accept as normal, a lifestyle that most of the world's major religions consider immoral and which the average American voter instinctively finds repulsive" (Helms, GLBT). These actions and statements reaffirmed an issue we continue to struggle with today--the separation of church and state. While some view LGPTQ+ rights as a matter of moral or religious conviction, Achtenberg's appointment underscored the importance of ensuring that public policy and government positions remain free from religious interference. Achtenberg also recalled in 2011 how she was confronted about her position on housing discrimination against gay people and whether or not she wanted to emplace protections. To which she denied, later stating, "I was so scared I wouldn't get confirmed... in 1993 I could not have imagined the temerity of asserting such a position" (24:10-24:47). Despite this she still managed to receive a vote of 58-31 affirming her position within Clinton's cabinet. One of her actions integrated the previously all-white town of Vidor, Texas creating opposition from the Ku Klux Klan. However, her role in this position, despite the national attention, gave the opportunity for gay individuals around the country to find hope in her success. Achtenberg herself stated "The ability to be in public life has been enormously positive to our movement, to our people, and being able to contribute has been very gratifying" (Achtenberg, GLBT).

To speak on her more recent activity and ideology, she gave a speech at Harvard in 2011 detailing how she believes "Old-time warriors like myself, it's time for us to stand down. Not because we're too old, or too tired, or too cynical, but because our skills are not the skills that are needed today to help the movement take the next step"(Achtenberg, Youtube, 11:35-12:20). This sentiment echoes a broader concern in today's political landscape, in which many older politicians refuse to step aside, clinging to their positions of power even as newer generations push for fresh perspectives and leadership. Achtenberg believes that in order to understand why we internalize homophobia and to do something about this, we must look to the next generation. Otherwise, the work of the LGBTQ+ movement will fail to be important and complex. It isn't so much about legalistic thinking or equal rights anymore, but rather a "cultural transformation... of souls, hearts, and minds" (Achtenberg, Youtube, 35:01-35:20). We have to learn to dress the antipathy that pervades the way our culture treats LGBTQ+ people.

Roberta Achtenberg's work, determination, and family life with her partner and son ultimately helped to broaden the definition of family within American culture.

Works Cited

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_e1RgSb4DM&list=PL1dGNrB33lS0vqNa7glklNwikwevRYbyl&index=1

http://www.glbtqarchive.com/ssh/achtenberg_r_S.pdf

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1993/05/06/Helms-vows-to-block-open-lesbians-nomination/9012736660800/

https://kids.kiddle.co/Roberta_Achtenberg

[thecontextofthecoconuttree]

Kamala Harris: The Typical "DEI Hire Bitch"

Within this second post dedicated to Kamala Harris, I will be addressing the adversity she has faced during this election season and how a majority of her criticisms rely on undermining her identity. This strategy allows her critics to avoid evaluating her beliefs and agenda and effectively reducing her to a “DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) Hire Bitch.”

Following Vice President Kamala Harris’ Democratic nomination, House Republicans leaders told lawmakers to focus on Harris’ record without “reference to her race and gender” (Politico). In 1989, Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term "intersectionality" to describe how the combination of various identities can produce more complex discrimination, exemplifying what Kamala Harris has faced in the public eye. A large concern entering this election is the prospect that this could affect voter’s choices this fall. In fact, Professor Crenshaw from Columbia Law stated that “what makes intersectional bias so powerful is that prejudice against one identity can persist in communities of another identity” (New York Times). However, by the time it was asked for politicians to consider Harris seriously, there were several Republican members of Congress who asserted that Harris only received the nomination “because of her ethnic background” calling her a “DEI hire”. Some even argued that her parent’s ethnic background made her ineligible to run for president with no conclusive evidence behind this. (Kamala’s birth in California falls under the 14th Amendment making her a valid citizen no matter her parent’s origins). "This rhetoric diminishes Kamala’s accomplishments and affirms that any Black person whom conservatives do not approve of did not earn their position." (New York Times) Its ideology is racist in validating the idea that Black people must be endorsed by a white person in order to be a respected individual. Others such as Donald Trump’s Vice Presidential Candidate, J.D. Vance referred to Harris as a “childless cat lady” and claimed that she is unfit due to the fact she “doesn’t have any biological children.” These claims are INCREDIBLY misogynistic and prey on the stereotype that women are first and foremost mothers, and that women who are not mothers are invaluable to society. Not only this but it insinuates that blended families, such as Harris’ are not “real families.” It completely washes away the fact that over fifteen percent of our American presidents (including George Washington) have never had children. Imagine telling George Washington, the “Father of our country” that having children would have made his presidency honorable.

In a Fox News interview, Donald Trump offered that America’s enemies would respond poorly to Kamala’s potential presidency: “I think they’ll walk all over her. She’ll be like a play toy… and I don’t want to say as to why, but a lot of people understand it” (Trump). What he was referring to in particular is Kamala’s femininity, which seems to be a common attack from him. This poorly crafted statement reflects the stereotype that women are emotionally and physically weaker and therefore less competent. Because of this there is often a pressure for female leaders to put on a performance of themselves as unemotional “iron ladies” rather than peacemakers, and we’ve seen this in American history with women such as Hillary Clinton. The Australian Institute of International Affairs performed a study on Americans to examine how the gender of an American president affected their public perception while navigating heightened tensions with China. The results showed that female leaders were punished over 11 points more than male leaders for pursuing identical policies. There is also the common stereotype of the “angry Black woman” which is constantly projected onto Harris. Trump has described her as “angry,” “mean,” “aggressive,” and “disrespectful” (New York Times) which play into her likability. It has also been shown that likeability is more likely to be a mandatory factor for female candidates than males. As a Black woman, this is already made harder based on the misconception that Black people are much more aggressive than white people. Not only this but typically feminine personalities are perceived as more likable but less capable of leadership, while more masculine behaviors can validate leadership abilities while reducing likability. When the average American was asked if they believed Trump respected women 31 percent of women believed this compared to 54 percent of men (Newsweek).

Without focusing directly on her opponent, a member of his campaign's advisory board, Harlan Hill called her an "insufferable lying bitch" (X). In fact, after Kamala Harris' nomination the word "bitch" shot up over 1,000 percent on Google in the United States. To this discovery, Kelly Dittmar, a professor here at Rutgers stated that this rise is "huge." (Newsweek). "When women run for office they face harassment and negative treatment done in gendered or sexualized ways" (Newsweek). These messages, when spread outwardly, send harmful messages to women and young girls that no matter how qualified you are for a position, entering the public eye exposes you to gender-based insults meant to humiliate. These comments continually discourage women from entering male-dominated fields and slow down progress towards gender equality. It isn't just about this election; but it's about whether our society, which is more "feminist" than before, can truly support women in leadership without belittlement based on their identities.

Works Cited:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/07/racist-sexist-attacks-kamala-harris/679232/

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/09/us/politics/kamala-harris-racism-sexism.html

https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/diplomatic-double-standards-the-sexism-a-president-kamala-harris-would-face/

https://x.com/Harlan/status/1314022287117627392

https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-donald-trump-sexist-misogynist-election-2024-campaign-social-media-1967536

[thecontextofthecoconuttree]

Kamala Harris: How she has Navigated Race, Gender, and American Politics

As early voting begins in the state of New Jersey on October 26, I believe that it is fitting to talk about the first Black woman and the first Asian American presidential candidate, Kamala Harris. I’ve decided to dedicate two posts, the first considering her life experiences and how she relates them within politics, and how she is perceived and in this tumultuous political climate. I also want to clarify that although this is focused on Harris as I intend to focus on female politicians, politics will never be black and white. I cannot say that I agree with all of her actions and policies as I’m sure we can say for all politicians.

When explicitly asked about her racial background Harris is often noted stating “I am running because I believe that I am the best person to do this job at this moment for all Americans, regardless of race and gender” (Harris, VOX article). Representation is evolving, and its relevance is deteriorating. Harris’ quote emphasizes the important discussions about how female politicians are perceived and our evolving dynamics of leadership as we become a more inclusive nation. Harris’ response is  potentially a conscious choice that derives from Hillary Clinton’s campaign focusing on her gender and “not enough” on issues. Not only that but political scientists have argued that female political candidates have lost the potential of historical relevance, as time has passed we’ve seen many women come into office since Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election in 2016. This becomes a challenge as Trump continually tries to push Harris into this box by focusing on gender and racial identity.

There is a very powerful moment within the June 27, 2019 Democratic Debate when Harris is confronting who was at the time Vice President Joe Biden for his role in supporting two Senators who had previously supported segregation and working with them to oppose bussing requested by the Board of Education. As she speaks towards Vice President Biden she states, “There was a little girl in California who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools and she was bused to school every day. That little girl was me,” (Harris, Youtube) and Biden, who had previously avoided eye contact, looked towards his future Vice President in acknowledgment that this issue personally affected her. It was a powerful personal testimony from Harris that not only challenged Joe Biden, but acknowledged the ongoing segregation within America. Born 10 years after Brown v. Board of Education (1954), she argued during Brett Kavanuagh’s Supreme Court confirmation that, “I wouldn’t be part of Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings had Chief Justice Warren not been on the Supreme Court to lead the unanimous decision in Brown v. Board. Had someone else been there, I may not have become a U.S. Senator. I know the impact one Justice can have” (Harris, NY Times). The Brown ruling transformed the landscape of public education and opened doors for marginalized communities to receive an equal education and develop future leaders. During Brown v. Board, the decision was once divided with Chief Justice Fred Vinson being concerned about its potential drastic impact, however when he died Chief Justice Warren was able to convince his fellow Justice’s to vote unanimously in favor of Brown. Historical legal battles affect individual’s lives and contemporary political realities, particularly those navigating intersectionality of gender, race, and power.

Following her childhood, she has used these developmental experiences to combat racism and sexism by advocating for criminal justice reform, the Equality Act (protecting against discrimination based on sexual identity, gender identity, or sexual orientation), women's reproductive rights, education equity, racial equity, police reform, as well as the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) focusing on marginalized communities.

Works Cited:

https://www.vox.com/politics/378103/kamala-harris-first-female-president-gender-clinton

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vG1Tnuvo78

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/30/us/politics/kamala-harris-berkeley-busing.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4F4edxloXCc

[thecontextofthecoconuttree]

The Notorious RBG and her Beginnings

Beginning this blog by reflecting on Ruth Bader Ginsburg's (A.K.A. RBG) impact on our country is altogether intimidating but also incredibly important. In order to most accurately describe the new wave of feminism within politics there has to be a discussion on Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the role she has had on inspiring women internationally and the influence she has had on gender equality within the United States.

That being said, Ginsburg’s first true experience with gender discrimination occured when she first entered Harvard Law and was invited to a dinner in which each of the 9 female students was escorted by a male professor and forced to defend the student spot they had “stolen” from a capable and intelligent man. In fact, when Ginsburg was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1993,  she learned that one of her old law school classmates had told a meeting of his Rotary Club that the men of Harvard Law used to refer to her as a “Bitch.” To which Ginsburg replied, “Better bitch than mouse” (Hirshman 14/223). Although she wasn’t known to be particularly vocal during her time at college, as many professors didn’t allow female students to speak in class, she still managed to obtain this nickname. Even though she attended Harvard in the 50’s it’s important to consider how these men referred to her within this male-dominated space. Ruth achieved much more than expected by her classmates and still received ridicule following her college career. Instead of being submissive, her response underscores her resilience and refusal to conform to society’s expectation of femininity.

Despite graduating at the top of her class at Columbia (she transferred from Harvard Law to follow her husband in New York), Ruth faced many challenges finding an employer as most men at the time were unwilling to hire female employees despite her recommendations from highly esteemed lawyers and professors. Eventually, Ginsburg signed on with a project at Columbia to study the procedure of the Swedish court procedures. When she arrived Sweden was in the midst of their feminist revolution. The argument Eva Moberg, a Swedish journalist, provided was that women liberation could not occur by women entering men’s spheres but that there must be a mutual integration between both gender constructs. During Ginsburg’s time in Sweden she was able to observe these feminist ideas become synthesized into law. When Ginsburg returned to America she became employed as a professor at Rutgers Law School. As students nationally began to sue their schools for violating the Civil Rights Act by maintaining discriminatory hiring practices, Ginsburg was "co-opted” (Askin) into teaching a Women and the Law course at Rutgers. As this was occurring, she showed immense interest in the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU)  case of Reed v. Reed (1971), where a divorced woman was unable to dictate the estate of her son due to his passing. RBG’s goal was to make the court view sex the same as they had race, “something people are born with and which should not determine their fates” (Hirshman 36/223). Although Ruth didn’t personally argue this case, her aid allowed for the courts to rule in favor of impartial practices in this regard and this was the first time the 14th Amendment was applied towards gender. Following this involvement, there happened to be a nation-wide discussion on female integration within several different colleges, and as this was going on, Ruth reflected on Rutgers as a men’s college and Douglass College as a smaller separate school intended for women. She became driven to disintegrate this separation and wrote a letter in 1971 to the president of Rutgers Richard Schlatter, informing him that a recent federal decision ordering the University of Virginia to integrate women would cause Rutgers College to take the same initiative and shortly following that Douglass College was disbanded and women were admitted into Rutgers. Even now, as a Rutgers student, it is so strange to consider the personal impact RBG’s actions have had on the life and education of ME and so many other women. 

In January of 1973, RBG made her first argument in the United States Supreme Court in the case of Frontiero v. Richardson (1973). Although male military men were allowed to claim dependent status for their wives, this case regarded a man’s ability to claim a dependent’s allowance based on his wife’s employment in the military. Ginsburg argued that “Sex like race is a visible, immutable characteristic bearing no necessary relationship to ability. Sex like race has been made the basis for unjustified or at least unproved assumptions, concerning an individual’s potential to perform or to contribute to society” (Ginsburg). This argument that Ginsburg proposed reevaluates society’s view of gender. She asserted that gender discrimination is as unreasonable as racial discrimination, which is described in the 14th Amendment, as both are rooted in assumptions that deny individuals the opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities.

In the early 80’s, Ruth left the ACLU to continue her career as a life-tenured judiciary. However, in 1993 President Bill Clinton nominated Ginsburg for the Supreme Court to which she accepted. In his defense of this nomination. President Clinton stated that “Many admirers of her work say that she is to the women’s movement what former Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall was to the movement for the rights of African-Americans.” Two of Ginsburg’s most influential Supreme Court decisions include Shelby County v. Holder (2013) and Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014).

Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s journey towards becoming a Supreme Court Justice exhibited a determined law student, professor, and then lawyer, who despite facing gender-discrimination kept working towards helping others experiencing the same. Her strategic legal battles, such as in Reed v. Reed and Frontiero v. Richardson, were crucial in setting important precedents for gender equality. Now, as we look back on Ginsburg's legacy, it extends far beyond her time on the bench. She inspired generations of women, including me, to assert their rights and challenge the status quo. As we reflect on her contributions, it's clear that her work laid the groundwork for the new wave of feminism within American politics, reminding us all of the power of resilience and the importance of fighting for justice.

Works Cited:

I primarily relied on the book Sisters in Law: How Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg Went to the Supreme Court and Changed the World written by Linda Hirshman. However, because I read a digital version the amount of pages varied due to the size and format of my screen so I’ve cited in the format (x/y) so that you would be able to find my quotes easier if you search for my sources.

I also used the website: https://www.oah.org/tah/november-4/teaching-about-the-feminist-rights-revolution-ruth-bader-ginsburg-as-the-thurgood-marshall-of-womens-rights/