The Occupy Movement continues to protest economic inequality. But it might be missing an important opportunity to create a lasting legacy that will resonate for generations to come: to push for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment.
A more effective and powerful approach to reaching the Occupy Movement's goals could be to create a "sequential system" by building a unified voice (which many -- even those who are ardent supporters -- believe the Occupiers are lacking) and attack each injustice -- one at a time -- starting with the horrendous state of women's rights in this country.
Why the Equal Rights Amendment?
It is logical to start with something as basic as pushing for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which will clearly state that men and women -- in the eyes of the law -- are equal. Women are still making 77 cents for every dollar that a man makes, and there are even fewer women on boards and in senior management than in previous years. More households are being headed by single mothers, which means that not only do women suffer, but so do our children.
The Equal Rights Amendment, first proposed in 1923 by Alice Paul, to affirm that women and men have equal rights under the law, is a simply stated sentence which no man or woman with a sense of justice and fairness should be against:
Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
What is the current status of the Equal Rights Amendment?
There are two main strategies for getting the Equal Rights Amendment passed at this time:
There are some who may believe the ERA is an outdated concept put forth by the original vanguard of the women's movement in the 1960s, and one that is no longer relevant. The truth, in fact, is quite the opposite. It has never been more important, essential and urgent than it is now.
Some who are not in favor of the Equal Rights Amendment claim it is redundant and unnecessary, often citing the 14th Amendment, which they say already protects the rights of women. It does not. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia publicly stated that the 14th Amendment was never intended to protect women. It was only intended to protect race. Federal and state law cannot protect citizens who are not protected under the Constitution. He made this remark in January 2011:
Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't.
Why do we need the Equal Rights Amendment?
Earlier this year, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) reintroduced the Equal Rights Amendment at an event in Washington D.C. I asked Rep. Maloney this question: Why do we need the Equal Rights Amendment? She answered:
Laws can be repealed. Judicial attitudes can shift. We continue to see demonstrable cases of systemic gender discrimination -- even in this day and age when women have come so far. Establishing the clear unambiguous language of the Equal Rights Amendment into the U.S. Constitution would have a real impact on our national consciousness. Our democracy rests on the principle of 'liberty and justice for all.' We need the ERA to ensure that this concept applies equal to women.
I presented the same question to Carolyn A. Cook, founder and CEO of United 4 Equality, who wrote the HJ Res. 47 resolution, which would effectively call for Congress to officially remove the time limit for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. She said:
Women in the armed services are fighting on the front lines in two wars to protect and defend a constitution that does not protect and defend them. The U.S. strongly urged Iraq and Afghanistan to include women in their new constitutions as they rebuild their societies; yet we have not led by example.
Who's Behind the Equal Rights Amendment?
Where are the powerful men and women who could -- with a few encouraging words -- get people out in the streets, writing letters to government leaders, energizing us to fight to make this a reality? Nancy Pelosi? Michelle Obama? Where is President Obama? The White House website posted an "official" position on the ERA which I found disheartening indeed. Tina Tchen, the Executive Director of the White House Council on Women and Girls, wrote a blog about how President Obama has "a proven track record of supporting the ERA" and how then-Senator Obama in 2008 was "a sponsor of a joint resolution ratifying the ERA... " Yes. That's one of the reasons we voted for him to begin with. But what is President Obama doing now that he is in the position to help turn the ERA from fantasy into fact? And, Oprah, if you are reading ... we all know what you could do.
But guess what? None of these people will do much of anything about the Equal Rights Amendment if they don't see that it's important to YOU. If every Occupier made passing the Equal Rights Amendment the first goal and priority, there's no doubt that others would jump on the ERA bandwagon: politicians, business leaders, celebrities and even average Americans who have not yet been able to sink their teeth into the Occupy Movement because of its perceived lack of clarity and focus.
Complacency will kill the Equal Rights Amendment, and so will thinking that it's no longer relevant. And, just as important, we need to change the tone of the discourse. Let's stop thinking about equality in terms of us against them, left vs. right, conservative vs. liberal, men vs. women. Reframe the issue of the Equal Rights Amendment and ask yourself this question:
Is it the right thing to do?
And, consider this: Can a country that prides itself as the leader and protector of democracy in the world, and one which implores other countries to include the word "women" in their constitutions (Afghanistan and Iraq), still not protect the rights of women in its own?
For a long time, I believed that as Americans, we had lost our will to stand up and be heard, but the Occupy Movement has given me hope that we can, if we band together, move from apathy to action. But, it would be a terrible mistake to let this opportunity--when the entire world is watching and listening--to slip through our fingers.
I read a "letter to the editor" in the New York Times this week from a college freshman, responding to an article which accused millennials of being "Generation Sell." The student wrote:
I am a millennial. I can attest to our generation's passion for social responsibility and entrepreneurship that William Deresiewicz describes in the article. Yet my generation is not "Generation Sell," as Mr. Deresiewicz claims; we are "Generation Do."
My generation is motivated by impact, not profit. We are products of the political idealism of Barack Obama, the creative genius of Steve Jobs and the globalization of a 21st-century world.If there's one thing we are not, it is quiet. We rally together and fight back against bigotry and hatred, organize in support of those political candidates who share our hopes for a better world, and refuse to stand by and wait for change.
My generation is sowing the seeds of social entrepreneurship and activism that will propel America to success in future generations. We, the millennials, are passionately screaming at the top of our lungs. The question is, Can you hear us?
I hear you. Do you hear me? Listen . . .
If you believe the Equal Rights Amendment should be in our U.S. Constitution, here's what to do:
. . . and lastly, raise your voice, loud and clear, and never, ever stop.


Follow Barbara Hannah Grufferman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/BGrufferman
Bob Burnett: Politics 2012: They've Gone Too Far
Duane Elgin: The Power of a ' Community Voice' Movement
This in itself should tell you what men really think of women and their rights. And unfortunately most women take their instructions about what's important in life from men, whether they are aware of it or not. So no one much is fighting for women.
If you'd like to see our listing of those ramifications, it's national 2PassERA.org that has that listing--"ERA for Women" button at the top of pages. It's an eye-popper for most. You can also download our ERA Resolution to get signed and returned; it obligates you to nothing you don't want. Sign it now so we can add your Resolution to the boxesful we boast before state legislators as we urge ratification of JUST 3 MORE STATES! We are a unique kind of organization, heavy on autonomy and kudos, no heavy lifting you don't want to do, no dues, no Big Bosses. Love to meet YOU by email at SandyO@PassERA to ans questions, comments etc.
Yes it does.
Scalia, once again, is talking nonsense.
The Equal Protection Clause already should cover gender.
I completely agree that we need a Constitutional Amendment and need it now. Equal rights for all. The ERA should not even be in question any longer. We need it passed, and we need it now.
"... it would be a terrible mistake to let this opportunity--when the entire world is watching and listening--to slip through our fingers..."
If we continue to stand together and in unison cry out until these points are won in our own government, surely it has the potential to impact the global community to act further in the interests of supporting equal rights for all people.
We can hope, we can march, we can continue to voice our beliefs. I only hope and pray we do so without faltering. We have a good amount of momentum across all methods of voicing. That is what the corporate rich boys are afraid of; people like Rep King and Bloomberg are not happy with this movement, and that is clear by their actions and words. Bullies are never happy when their enemies make headway.
Good luck to you. Keep up this positive, good work.
When there is so much to confront, disentangle, and reconfigure (our economy, our food industry, our health care system, our family courts, our employment challenges), it seems that this - for its psychic motivation as you say - would be a no-brainer.
Like you, I'm plese to read @giftsthatpurr's comments, reminding us how far we've come, and yet - how far we have to go.
The ERA was introduced into every session of Congress between 1923 and 1972, when it was passed and sent to the states for ratification. The seven-year time limit in the ERA's proposing clause was extended by Congress to June 30, 1982, but at the deadline, the ERA had been ratified by 35 states, leaving it three states short of the 38 required for ratification. It has been reintroduced into every Congress since that time.
We have two large, major religious groups that have the ear of the president and the politicians and those groups relegate women to the rear of the bus. We have those in power who listen to those groups and will never see women as equals. These two groups and others want to take our tax dollars but not provide women with birth control - not even information, much less the pill or diaphragm or any other method. No abortions even in the case of a mother with other children at home and the overwhelming probability of the death of both the mother and unborn child. And yet they receive our tax dollars to promote their ideologies.
Until we, as women, make good decisions on our political choices, we face an uphill fight for equality. Investigate the candidates and incumbents on your own - do NOT believe the media, the promises, the rhetoric. We have a large voting bloc and need to make our voices heard through our choices.
My point is simply that these types of articles are full of feel-good poor-me rhetoric but short of actually examining what would be necessary to achieve the desired outcomes, which are never explicitly stated anyway.
Almost all male U.S. citizens, and male aliens living in the U.S., who are 18 through 25, are required to register for the military draft. However, men who currently register are not automatically inducted into military service. Currently, the United States operates its military through volunteer enlistment. The last time men were inducted into the military was during the Vietnam War. Registration for a possible future draft is required to ensure America's preparedness in the event of a military crisis. In the event of a crisis that necessitates a draft to be invoked, men would be called in sequence determined by random lottery number and year of birth. They would then be examined for mental, physical and moral fitness by the military before being deferred or exempted from military service or inducted into the Armed Forces. You may register as soon as you reach the age of 17 years and 3 months but must register within 30 days of turning 18.
The reason I want the ERA in the constitution is because if it isn't there, then our legislators/law makers can - at any time - turn back the gains that we women have achieved after working for said gains for such a long time. It is only civil rights we are asking to have be the law of the land; as Ms. Grufferman says, "liberty and justice for all."
I wish my mother could have owned her own property (when dad died;) I wish my daughter, in the Army, had been treated equal when she was brain injured while being raped; I wish I had been able to own a credit card in my name in the 1960s; I wish I had been able to purchase effective birth control prior to the mid 1960s; and I wish today's working single mothers had access to affordable child care, etc., . . . I do not want to go back and re-visit any of those times for me, my daughters my two grandaughters or any other woman in this country.
Maybe if we had more women in power, more women making decisions, we might have less war.
There are a great many wrongs in the world--in this country--and not having the Equal Rights Amendment as a permanent part of our U.S. Constitution is one. It must be rectified. Not only will it give us legal protection, but it will give us psychic motivation to move forward to help eradicate other terrible wrongs -- abuse of women and children for starters.
Not being a politician, or even a political organizer, I am doing what I can to create a groundswell of support for the ERA, and those who have been unwavering in their support of it cannot continue to do it alone. As you said in one of your comments here: you are willing to stand with other women to see that this happens. Our job is to get others--men and women--to stand with us, too.
As long as the ERA remains a fantasy instead of fact, I will continue to write these articles--much to the annoyance of many of those who left comments here.
Please stay in touch . . . and again, thank you.
Barbara
The people in my immediate family, and my closest friends (men and women in family and friendships) all support ERA. I am retired from the work force, but still maintain ties with many, and they also support ERA. The red states do not, and right now there is a stronger devaluing of women than existed 10 - 15 years ago (throughout the general population.) Crimes against women and children seem to have escalated, which may be a sign of the unrest and difficulties brought about by the uncertainty in our world and in our economy. If women (and men) don't have a home, enough healthy food to eat and no job, they are not inclined to care about anything except getting basic needs met. That comes first. I will, however, never give up working for equality for everyone - and most especially for women (and children.)
Thank you for continuing the "good fight" - and please, never stop until goals are met!
In the United States, active conscription ended in 1973 but the requirement to register remains legally alive and enforced
Try adding the draft to your amendment. Real women want to sighn up for the draft
Growing up in a military family, we were also somewhat isolated from the rest of the world. Small bases, small communities, but lots of the same expectations from males and females alike (at least as far as we as children saw things).
It wasn't until I got out into the "real world" that I experienced gender discrimination. Street harassment, workplace sexual harassment, education system "gender-appropriate" career choices "encouragement", domestic and sexual violence against women, media messaging that objectifies and limits the role of women in our society, pay inequality - there hasn't been a year that's gone by that I haven't either experienced these things directly or indirectly through female friends and family members. And now I'm seeing my daughter experience these same things directly and indirectly.
To say we don't need the ERA is to say we don't need oxygen.
Teaching girls self-respect is a huge start. But all the self-respect in the world won't help you in a losing battle against a sexist employer. Been there. Done that. Didn't win.
As a boy I was more likely to be targeted with violence by other males. If I felt bad about something becoming emotional would be seen as weakness and nobody would have any sympathy for me be they male or female. I was less favored by female teachers who preferred the girls. The list goes on, the thing is men don't go around pronouncing their daily struggles under the banner of a social issue. They don't declare their challenges oppression. They call it life and move on.
I think a lot of the minor incidents women here over play are basically life happening. No ideal is possible. The evidence of equality is in the success of women around you, if you are not one of them then sorry. The fact is women can and do A LOT. That's as good as it get's the rest you need to handle on your own.
I think, as a whole, we have to look at the inequalities perpetuated throughout American society and decide that we're going to admit that they are indeed there and address them, and I believe the ERA will be an eye opener if enough people get behind it. As the author said, this is not about supporting one group in favor of another or pitting one group against another. When we fight for equality, we're fighting to have access to the same successes and failures, the same rewards and punishments. While the balance has shifted, we have not yet reached full equality on any level, and this is at least a step in opening up a discussion that can lead us down the right path.
A long road to where? What exactly can't women do?
Unless you are suggesting we still have not made boys and girls act exactly the same but people in general don't act the same. I really don't know what it is we need to be doing at this point that has not been done because to my knowledge women can do anything men can do. Except fight in combat, but don't worry I am sure we can increase the number of female casualties in the future. For now I think military women should enjoy their life and limbs.
What I'm referring to would be labeled social/societal rights. Simply put, access to the same opportunities for both genders. The ability to be in receipt of unbiased treatment for both genders. The ability to stay within or step outside of traditional gendered roles without reprisals and recriminations. To the best of your knowledge, which of course is limited to your experiences and the information you've been able to access, we have achieved these things. However, general female opinions (as assessed from my own discussions with the women I know, opinions as shared by women on message boards/online sites such as this one, and credible research), we have inched closer to equality but are not yet there.
Best wishes,
--Mike Barkley, Democrat, Candidate for Congress new CA-10 District, http://www.mjbarkl.com/run.htm