PAGE 12 // WEDNESDAY. DECEMBER 2, 2009
THE PENDULUM
w.
(f:
pinions
Women in politics
Double standards, preconceptions abound
Ashley Jobe
Columnist
There has yet to be a
female president. The political
landscape is completely
dominated by men. Women
account for only 17 percent of
Congress, and there are only
six current female governors.
So why are these numbers so
out of sync with the nation’s
demographics?
It’s because of America’s
hang ups and preconceptions
about the capacities of women
and men in their respective occupational fields.
Women have a more difficult time in positions that
involve public scrutiny.
Though women and men are biologically wired
a bit differently, that is not an excuse for the
discrepancies we see in the treatment of women
subject to public examination.
The ratios of testosterone, progesterone
and estrogen are measured in different levels
throughout both genders, but all exist in both.
But the sociological reasons for the differences
associated with either gender are man-made and
can be manipulated.
For those who think there are intrinsic
differences between the sexes and that difference
plays out in the separation between the sexes in
the workplace, being a woman does not mean
demoted power. Being a woman does not call for
negative or dissimilar treatment, nor does it call for
unnecessary preference or consideration.
Hillary Clinton has long been ostracized by
her critics during her years as first lady, her
run for the presidency and her current role as
secretary of state. She is deemed “too emotional”
and “unpredictable.” The expectations placed on
women start with the upbringing of America’s
children. Parents adhere to a number of norms that
eventually form constraints within the context of
the child’s future endeavors.
A girl who is taught that her success is
contingent upon the personality traits she displays
is already at a disadvantage. She should be able to
be, act and look exactly as she likes. Her ability is
not dependent upon “desirable" traits.
Controversy arose regarding Newsweek’s Oct.
13, 2008 cover featuring Sarah Palin. The cover
picture of Palin was up close and personal — laugh
lines, crow’s feet and all. She is an aging woman yet
the photo selection underwent extreme criticism
for being unabashedly real and honest about the
subject. Then her most recent Newsweek cover, with
her pictured in short shorts and athletic gear, was
publicly rejected by her and her representatives.
“The choice of photo for the cover of this week’s
Newsweek is unfortunate,” Palin said.
She deemed the cover “sexist” and the
picture “out of context.” First, there is uproar
about the excessive photoshopping of women,
and movements, such as Dove’s campaign for
real beauty, were created to combat unrealistic
depictions of women.
But when a middle-aged governor gets her
picture taken, people are up in arms about how
“real” Palin should look. Perhaps they should
have lessened the blow by eliminating the more
candid aspects of her facial features, but even then
people might be upset that the alterations were not
representative of her actual age.
Would this discussion even exist if a man’s photo
were being selected for a magazine cover?
“Will Americans want to watch a woman get
older before their eyes on a daily basis?” Rush
Limbaugh said.
We cannot expect preferential treatment for a
woman and overlook the fact that the difference we
make in our mind, especially in this scenario, is in
and of itself sexist.
The glass ceiling still exists. The reasons why
professions are predominantly male or female
are because of notions carried in the psyches of
both men and women in the workforce because
of personal experiences, prejudiced intent on the
part of employers and by gender norms that have
been accepted as true because of their historical
precedence.
Unless America’s preconceived notions of women
change, the cycle will continue as is.
The heart behind the lens
Do we have the power to
create good in this world?
Photojournalist Dave Labelle
believes
On Nov. 18 Labelle came
to Elon to speak about his
professional journeys. The first
half of the speech was mostly
techniques, guidelines and how
Marlena Chertock to improve photographs. Labelle
Columnist suggested a few minutes of break
before he set in on the next part.
He needed that time to truly
switch gears.
Labelle explained why he became a photojournalist
and why he and his family have been on the road
since early September.
“I believe good begets good,” he said.
He told a story of a month he spent shooting
photos of homeless people in California. The Ventura
County Star published the photos biweekly in a spot
called “Hard Times.”
People would often call the newspaper asking
to get in touch with the homeless person pictured,
wanting to offer them a room in their homes, Labelle
said.
Positive outcomes seemed to come out of unveiling
the problem.
Labelle said he is trying to do good in this world,
just trying to create “pictures with purpose,” as his
Web site said. He said he thinks if newspapers show
positive aspects every once in a while, instead of only
the negative, the world could be better.
“I’m failing miserably,” he said, evidently humble
of his efforts.
Much of Labelle’s philosophy came from a life-
changing experience when he was seven. In January
1969, there was a flood in his hometown of Ventura
County, Calif., and he and his family were trapped
on the roof of their house. After this near-death
experience, Labelle and several of his family members
were saved, but his mother did not survive.
The day after the destruction, a reporter came to
interview Labelle and his father. Labelle recalls the
reporter being sweet and understanding. He said he
wanted to be just like that reporter, to be able to help
others in their tough times.
Labelle explained he wants God to look back on his
life and say, “Well, he tried.”
1 never thought such professions could have
religious motivations. Often, giving a project or
occupation a sense of religion gives it more meaning
to people. This is what Labelle has found, and he is
helping others with his talent.
Labelle used PowerPoint slides with sayings such
as “It’s not all about me” to emphasize the need to
help others.
Throughout his speech, Labelle encouraged the
attendees to use their talent to make a difference. He
said we have so much power — we only have to use it.
Of course, that’s not to say photojournalism
or journalism needs a Christian motivation to be
meaningful. People can find and give meaning to
their professions on their own. That, after all, is the
end goal of this life — to give life its own meaning,
to find something to truly enjoy that gives existence
significance.
Religion sometimes guides the way, but it is not
always needed. As long as there’s an occupation that
satisfies and it’s used to raise awareness of issues
or to promote respect and humanitarian aid, Labelle
would agree with the journey.
We must realize the world is a bigger place than
what surrounds us. The world does not revolve
around us and it is important to care for our global
community.
As Labelle says, if more people act as bridges to a
better world, perhaps more good will follow.
www.pendulumopinions.wordpress.com
How low did those 2000s go?
No, seriously.
It was pretty bad.
Dan Rickershauser
Columnist
A church’s „
ransom ^
Given the many political
missteps the Roman Catholic
Church has made throughout
history, one would be led to
believe that the church would
be reluctant to continue to
inject its beliefs into United
States politics. But they make
that assumption.
On Nov. 12, the Washington
Post reported that the
Catholic Archdiocese of
Washington, D.C., would cut
all social services they provide for the city if the
Washington, D.C., City Council approved same-sex
marriage.
The Washington, D.C., Council is expected to
approve the gay marriage proposal in the coming
months. The church’s social services branch,
Catholic Charities, serves 68,000 people in
Washington, D.C., and the organizations shelters
serve up to one-third of the city’s homeless
willing to go to them.
What the Catholic Church is threatening
is nothing short of blackmail, throwing the
thousands of Washington, D.C., residents
dependent on the church’s social services under
the bus. Such an action would be nothing less
than using these dependents as mere pawns as
the church flexes its political muscle.
It is an extraordinary lapse in morality for the
church, threatening those who have nothing to do
with the Washington, D.C., City Council’s decision.
That’s not to say that the Catholic Church has
no right to say and believe whatever it wants.
This is, after all, the United States of America,
a country whose First Amendment in the Bill
of Rights ensures both the freedom of speech
and religion (two things that are oftentimes
synonymous).
But to use social services that assist the
homeless and others in need as a political wager is
nothing short of blasphemy. So far, Virginia Gov.
Tim Kaine and Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley,
both Catholics, have come out criticizing the
church’s threat.
While the proposed gay marriage law won’t
force churches to perform same-sex marriages,
the church is concerned that the anti-
discrimination laws in the bill would require
Catholic charities to extend employee benefits to
their employees in same-sex marriages as a result
of city contracts.
The Catholic Church has made many steps to
ensure its steadfast loyalty to biblical doctrines
that consider homosexuality a mortal sin remains
intact, even if that means stepping away from
other church doctrines.
In October, the Vatican announced a plan
hoping to recruit conservative Anglicans and
Episcopalians back into the Catholic Church who
have been dissatisfied with their own churches’
decisions to allow women and openly gay priests,
as well as blessing homosexual partnerships.
This new policy even allows married Anglican
and Episcopalian priests into the Catholic Church,
a huge step away from the age-old Catholic policy
that demands that priests remain celibate. The
Vatican is apparently willing to compromise on
those doctrines.
If the Catholic Church wants to become a haven
for intolerance, it is well on its way. Given young
people throughout the Western world's increasing
acceptance and tolerance of homosexuality, the
Catholic Church is going to be on the wrong side
of history.
It has been there before, in the Crusades and
the Holocaust to name just a few instances. If
we’ve learned anything about how the Catholic
Church has dealt with these mistakes, perhaps in
a 100 years or so it will issue a formal apology
its actions.