“Has Congress become like an episode of ‘Mad Men’?” Linda Sanchez ponders.

[madfloridian]

After watching that period show from an era I remember well, I very much appreciated her comparison of the last episode or two to the weird actions of our Democratic congress this week.

From Judith Warner at the New York Times:

‘Mad Men,’ Maddening Times

“Has Congress become like an episode of ‘Mad Men’?” California Congresswoman Linda Sanchez asked this week, after the House of Representatives approved a version of health care reform that contained what some pro-choice advocates are calling the toughest restrictions on women’s access to abortion since the passage of Roe v. Wade.

Her evocation of the bad old days was well-timed. For this past weekend saw not only the political sleight of hand that stripped millions of women’s abortion coverage from the House’s health care reform bill; it also brought the season finale of AMC’s highly popular pre-Roe-era series, which concluded with the unhappy housewife heroine Betty Draper leaving her philandering husband, Don, for the promise of marriage to another man she barely knows.

As her lawyer, and Don, have made clear, without a man Betty is nothing. She has the right to nothing — not to marital money, not even to custody of her children. It was, in large part, to free women from this utter dependency upon — and definition by — men that the women’s movement came into being. Self-determination, at base, is what abortion rights in particular have always been about.

Even in the 70's divorced women were quite often shunned by church members, they had to fight to get even the most basic things.

The Stupak amendment perhaps did a favor to people who want to move forward. It showed in full living color that the party was ready to regress in order to please the religious community.

Can you just imagine what they might have amended if they did NOT have a big majority? I tremble to think of it.

[madfloridian]

1. A few quotes from the end of the article..

Stupak-Pitts passed not just because a group of Catholic bishops bore down on Democratic lawmakers. It passed because it could. Maybe because our cultural memory is short; because our fantasyland nostalgia for a world of stay-at-home moms and gray flannel dads is too great, because when push comes to shove, in tough times, there’s still a willingness to throw women under the bus.

Abortion access is already all but gone in many states; it has been so for years. Virginia recently elected a governor despite his well-publicized early writing on how working women are “detrimental to the family,” and despite his record of voting against ending wage discrimination between men and women.

Last night, I watched “By the People,” HBO’s new documentary on the election of Barack Obama.

“We’re gonna change our country. We’re gonna change the world,” I heard candidate Obama say.

But we didn’t. And, at this point, I sometimes wonder if we ever really wanted to.

Because our cultural memory is short. Because there is no one speaking out except women.

[chimpymustgo]

3. I posted this this morning. It's a great analogy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7006464&mesg_id=7006464

I can't believe women are lying down with the fingers crossed on this one. It's an OUTRAGE.

[madfloridian]

4. I posted at 2 am...but...

it dropped and I am on so many ignore lists...so that makes two posts.

[femrap]

5. You're not on my Ignore

List. Young women, in particular, have got to step up on this. I can't believe we're fighting the same battles that we did 40 to 50 years ago.

Fucking patriarchy.

I say we need to 'reframe' this issue starting with bumper sticker ideas: Sperm Control...and I'm not talking about Whales. Or, Clipped Balls...Problem Solved. Or, Patriarchy is so Passe.

The boys have to be placed in the position of CAUSING the unintended pregnancies. I am tired of defending....I want to go on the Offense. I'd love to see Harry Reid defending his right to impregnate whomever he wants. Is he Morman?

Plus there is the issue of Compulsory Motherhood and lack of women defining their destinies and 'pursuit of happiness.'

[sufrommich]

2. Posted here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7006464

with some interesting comments.

[dgibby]

6. I have a good friend in her 60's who was, and still is, an activitist.

Back in the day, she marched, wrote letters,etc, in favor of Roe v Wade.

Her take on this now: "I'm old, I'm sick, I'm tired. I'm not fighting this anymore. Young women today don't understand what it took to get them this basic right, they take it for granted. It's their fight now. If they want to keep it, they need to work for it."

I'm sorry she feels this way, but I do understand, as she is in a life and death battle with several types of cancer, and is using all her "fight" to just stay alive.

She still sends e-mails, signs petitions, but that's the hetent of her activism today. Sadly, I suspect there are many, many more out there just like my friend.

[sufrommich]

7. Unfortunately, it will most likely be a battle that will have to

be fought again by a younger generation of women. As Joni Mitchell once said " don't it always seem to be, that you don't know what you got till it's gone".