Yesterday afternoon, the news broke that Jill Abramson, the executive editor of The New York Times and the first-ever woman to hold that position, was leaving her position. Managing editor Dean Baquet would be replacing her, making him the first-ever African-American executive editor at the Times.
Jill Abramson had been managing editor at the Times (the number two position) since 2003 and before that was the Washington, D.C. bureau chief and an investigative reporter. She was appointed executive editor at the Times back in June 2011. If you don’t give a shit about the NYC media scene, the news may have simply looked like a personnel issue, indistinguishable from any other revolving door news item. But details about Abramson’s tenure and exit point to something bigger — shedding light on how the Times may have mistreated its first female executive editor and illustrating what it still means today to be a woman in power. Keep reading »
“No [I'm not a feminist] because I love men, and I think the idea of ‘raise women to power, take the men away from the power’ is never going to work out because you need balance. With myself, I’m very in touch with my masculine side. And I’m 50 percent feminine and 50 percent masculine, same as I think a lot of us are. And I think that is important to note. And also I think that if men went down and women rose to power, that wouldn’t work either. We have to have a fine balance.”
FIRST, a new rule: any future female celebs — especially those as young as 20-year-old Shailene Woodley – who are asked if they consider themselves “feminists” need to read the actual dictionary definition of the word before they answer, because I am sick to death of bullshit, stupid answers like this one. Here it is, for future reference, emphasis mine: “An advocate for the social, political, legal, and economic rights for women equal to those of men.”
Keep reading »
A lot has happened since 2010 when we got to witness Sally Draper’s temper tantrum as a little girl, and feminist blogger Amanda Marcotte made the astute observation that Sally Draper was a feminist hero. That tantrum was our first glimpse into what would later become Sally’s numerous instances of resistance against a broken old world order. She has internalized every dysfunction of her parents and her culture and rejects it. It symbolized the great uprising of women and people of color that would follow; Civil Rights marches and Gloria Steinem would be the epic “tantrums” at large that would reshape the country forever. Four years later in our current TV time, Marcotte predicted correctly.
As an avid superfan of “Mad Men” from the get-go, it’s fun to realize that I have been growing up with Sally now for almost her entire life-span: childhood, puberty, now young womanhood. But from the end of last season up to now, I have been especially jolted by the writers’ particular and deliberate crafting of Sally’s character as a feminist force. It’s no mistake that she is shaping to be the most feminist character in the series. Joan, Peggy and Megan certainly come close, but Sally truly represents the next generation. (Warning: Spoilers ahead!) Keep reading »
It’s about time human mothball Phyllis Schlafly got tucked away in the attic of history. But somehow, someway, the anti-feminist and founder of the uber-conservative Eagle Forum is still sharing dumb, archaic ideas that were rejected by society over half a century ago. Her latest batch of craziness is an op-ed in the Christian Post about how the “pay gap” is a bunch of bunk. Women just don’t want to work as hard as men, you see! Men work at harder jobs! Oh, and also, what do ladies need money for anyway? Don’t we know paying our own bills ourselves scares away the menfolk? Keep reading »