Obama Signs Order Creating Women’s Council

March 11th, 2009, by

As we mentioned yesterday, it’s Women’s History Month. And today, President Obama signed an executive order creating a White House Council on Women and Girls. The council’s first year will be focused on the “economic status of women,” establishing a “balance between work and family,” preventing “violence against women, at home and abroad” and improving “women’s health care.” Valerie Jarrett will head the council.

Some people are on board with the new council. Some people say it’s not enough. What do you think?

  • (anonymous)

    I am deeply disappointed in Pres. Obama. Although I agree about 95% with his other policies, his take on gender issues can best be described as anti-male bigotry of the worst sort. While he seems to have a genuine commitment to justice and equality, his experience in fatherlessness, his female-dominated upbringing, and his total immersion in radical feminism has left him tone-deaf to men’s concerns. His recent creation of a White House Council on Women and Girls is the culmination of this brainwashing. Earth to Barack: there are TWO genders. At this point in time, men’s issues are far more urgent than those of women but are completely ignored:
    Despite boys faring worse in school in during the early 90s, Carol Gilligan’s bogus report lead to massive spending on girls. To date, the number of federal girl-only programs alone fills a catalog 3 inches thick. This does not include state, local, and private initiatives. Boy-only programs, however, do not exist (with the exception of those programs that portray boys as proto-abusers). Boys are drugged at a 4-to-1 rate, dropout at a 2-1 margin, are far more likely to need remedial work, and there has been a 71% increase in boys who say they hate school. (The latter stat may be influenced by the spate of Women Studies-indoctrinated female teachers who view their male charges as patriarchs-in-training.)
    College enrollment is 56% female to 44% male. The university has been described as hostile to men, perhaps due to: anti-male sexual harassment and date rape lectures during orientation, men’s sports decimated by Title IX, Women Centers, “Take Back the Night” marches, Women Studies, Vagina Monologue haranguing, girl-power networking, women-only scholarships, inducements for women to enter math or science but no incentive for men to enter the humanities, etc. AND for the black community there is a 2 to 1 female to male ratio of college students. IT IS A TRUISM THAT SINGLE-GENDER PROGRAMS WILL HAVE AN EXAGGERATED EFFECT ON LOWER SOCIO-ECONOMIC OR AT-RISK GROUPS.
    Although the longevity gap between men and women is 7 yrs. (14 btw. white women and black men) and despite the fact that men suffer the most from 9 of 10 of the most deadly health issues (barring breast cancer) there are over 100 commissions on women’s health, thousands of women’s clinics, at least 5 times more spent on women’s health, and countless private and media campaigns…and very little for men. E.g., even the idea of a prostate cancer awareness stamp failed to pass Congress.
    Martin Fiebert did a meta-analysis of roughly 130 PEER-REVIEWED studies of domestic violence, finding that women and men suffered from it at the same rate and that women initiated it more. However, billions of tax dollars have found their way into radfem coffers to create thousands of women sheltersanot one for menaand to demonize men, and now boys, with biased PSAs and to instruct the police and courts to only prosecute men. Not a dollar goes for male victims (except gays).
    The bogus issue of a female wage gap has been disproved by a horde of economists and Warren Farrell’s excellent book “Why Men Earn More.” But most notably by the Dept. of Labor’s CONRAD report that was DELETED FROM THE WEBSITE in January by the Obama D. of L., presently contemplating a Pay Equity Bill. Now with the recession hitting males at a 4 to 1 ratio vis a vis females, with overall female employment actually increasing, the president makes a commitment to increasing…female employment.
    Thanks to a misapplication of VAWA and a highly anti-male bias in family courts, the father-child bond has been severely stressed, in many cases completely severed. Gov’t programs coupled with no-fault (unilateral) divorce has lead to a drastic increase in single-mothers-by-choice, reducing fathers to visiting ATMs. And yet, then-candidate Obama insulted the majority absentee dadsacruelly ripped from their child’s armsawith his Fathers Day diatribe. The child support witch hunt is alive and well and growing, but any reform of custody and visitation enforcement is off the radar.
    There are many more male issues, but this post is already a bit long. However, in closing, I must point out that if only the feminists have his earathe very same feminists responsible for many of the injustices against menathe sad state of men’s and fathers’ wellbeing in this nation will only worsen by leaps and bounds.

  • Stephanie

    I hope that Obama adresses the fiscal abuse that may occur with infrastructure contracts being awarded to only male white owned companies (who use their wives names as principal owner -more than 51%)masquerading as female-owned businesses; thus excluding REAL women and minority-owned businesses.
    I voted for President Obama, not because I am black, but because I really think he wants to do good for the disenfranchised and forgotten class, the poor, minorities and women. I just don’t want to see nepotism and the typical exclusion of poor and minorities when contracts are awarded, there needs to be oversight.
    Additionally, vacant plants and warehouses can be retooled in rural and inner city areas to allow training of women so that many single mother lead households can participate in these new program developments when they are finally ready to hire.

  • (anonymous)

    I particularly like the stance some European countries have taken in regards to maternity leave. In some instances, both parents are off with the mother being at home for one year. I’m still trying to understand why mothers in the U.S. are given such little time to nurture their children before returning to work. If we are hoping to have stable, well adjusted adults in our world, we need to start the ground work from birth.

Last modified: April 26, 2011 at 11:16 am