Yesterday I was listening to the radio when I heard Sean Hannity domineering a young woman who sounded like she had just become conscious of the effects of male domination in universities. You know the Summers story, a socially-challenged scientist suggests that genetic differences between men and women account for low numbers of women in science. It's not the concept alone that matters to concerned women; it's the effects of such a position in the actions of the institution that this man represents. Mainly, Harvard has a lot of trouble tenuring women. Summers is the premier spokesperson and a key symbol for Harvard and here he is suggesting that the paucity of women in science is caused by our genetic make-up. Could this also be the explanation for women not getting tenure as easily as men?
Summers comments might suggest that he views our lack of representation in general as our own fault and there is nothing we can do about it!
Critics of Summers are saying that women deserve more consideration than this--we need both representation and respect in situations when we CANNOT represent ourselves. In the context of a world where very few men take responsibility for solving problems that particularly effect women (rape, breast cancer, and birth control, where's "the pill" for men? Viagra?) Summers' callous comment is a slap in the face.
But what did Hannity want to know? He wanted to know what innate differences the Harvard student found between men and women. He had already gotten the Harvard woman to admit that there are too many differences between men and women to catalog, but the only remaining question that Hannity had for her was, "Name a couple of innate differences?" he kept asking her, "It's a simple question...you're a smart girl...why won't you answer my question?" She kept trying to hammer that he was controlling the discourse and she kept talking about the systemic problems for women at Harvard; he kept cutting her microphone. And of course, he was gleeful that liberals appeared to be censoring speech. I never heard him address any of her points. [Note to those who debate reactionary conservatives--ask them questions, too, like, "Why don't you seem concerned about how this might be affecting women's tenure processes?" Give them some responsibility for creating solutions--they hate that.]
Hannity's actions were a total illustration of exactly what some men WON'T do to extend a hand to help solve women's concerns.
No listening, no empathy, no understanding, and no respect.
Why does Fox continue to pay this reactionary toadstool?
No comments:
Post a Comment