So. I have decided to weigh in on the Ann Romney non-troversy, because I've been thinking about it a LOT over the past few days since Hilary Rosen made her ill-fated comment and subsequent apology.
I'm not going to defend the first part of Rosen's comments - to say that she inartfully stepped in it, in my opinion, would be an understatement. But there's a lot more subtext and discussion here that bears highlighting - it's time we take back this particular narrative because there is much in Rosen's comments worthy of expanding upon.
More over the fold.
Let me provide the FULL extent of Rosen's comments that kicked off this particular shitstorm (source):
With respect to economic issues, I think actually that Mitt Romney is right, that ultimately women care more about the economic well-being of their families and the like. But he doesn't connect on that issue either. What you have is Mitt Romney running around the country saying, 'Well, you know my wife tells me that what women really care about are economic issues and when I listen to my wife that's what I'm hearing.'
Guess what? His wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She's never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school and why do we worry about their future.
So I think that, yes, it's about these positions and yes, I think there will be a war of words about the positions. But there's something much more fundamental about Mitt Romney. He just seems so old-fashioned when it comes to women and I think that comes across and I think that that's going to hurt him over the long term. He just doesn't really see us as equal.
The non-troversy portion is in bold, obviously, and the Big Issue that righties and the GOP are pointing out is that first sentence about Ann Romney not working a day in her life. I'll admit right up front - that's a BIG "oops" - because that one sentence is both inflammatory and then utterly obscures the validity of the rest of her comment. Rosen's bad - take away that one sentence and there is no non-troversy.
So let's take the second part:
She's never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school and why do we worry about their future.
True. Ann Romney has been fortunate enough to be able to
CHOOSE to be a stay-at-home mom. By a show of hands - how many of you women out there with children who also work do so out of sheer necessity? I know that in my real life, I can easily point to multiple women who are also mothers who also work and who do NOT have the luxury of NOT working out of sheer financial necessity. I know as many women who
CHOOSE to work even though they could swing full-time mom-hood. Finally, I know many of my male co-workers whose wives are also able to
CHOOSE to stay at home and raise the children.
The key word is "Choose", which is the reason I'm writing this at all.
Being pro-choice applies across-the-board for me. It's not exclusive to a woman's legal right and access to terminating a pregnancy. It's a woman's right to choose to buy a house without a man on the loan, or to buy a vehicle without a husband's or father's permission. It's her right to choose to prevent an unwanted pregnancy by having unfettered, uncomplicated access to birth control. It's her right to choose to work and be paid equally as her male counterparts for that work. Stuff like that.
My mother and other women who came before fought hard to provide more open doors for women like me. Not terribly long ago, the only career a woman could "choose" was that of a teacher or a nurse or something clerical. Being a lawyer or a CEO or a doctor wasn't done. Buying a house or car or getting a credit card independently wasn't done.
So getting back to Ann Romney. She is NOT pro-choice, and I don't mean that strictly in the abortion sense (although we know she is firmly anti-choice in that realm). She is out campaigning for her husband (which is understandable) and, as such, she is advocating the positions he is taking. So let's explore those positions.
So let's enumerate what the Ryan Budget, which Mitt Romney enthuasitically embraces and for which is wife is campaigning, does to women (via American Progress Action:
1. Cuts Women, Infants & Children Program (WIC)
2. Cuts Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
3. Cuts Head Start and child care assistance
4. Cuts job training
5. Cuts Pell Grants
6. Cuts health services for low- and moderate-income families
7. Raises Medicare eligibility age & turns it into a voucher (56% of Medicare beneficiaries are women)
Those are just the highlights of proposed cuts to programs that directly impact women - particularly poorer and middle-class working women; women who would love to have the CHOICE to stay at home and raise their children. This takes that insult and converts it to injury - because women wind up farther from being able to do that and increases the stress - financial and personal - on working women everywhere.
Back to Ann Romney again. We've established that she's out campaigning on behalf of her husband, and further that this is an understandable activity for her to pursue. As such, she is a key surrogate for her husband, espousing his positions and views as the new titular head of the Republican party. This is the same party that is systematically attacking women and dismantling their rights on a state-by-state, and sometimes Federal, level. Partially via MoveOn:
1. Numerous states are restricting access to the LEGAL practice of terminating a pregnancy through a variety of invasive and frankly condescending methods
2. Georgia is trying to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking and domestic violence from "victim" to "accuser"
3. South Dakota is introducing legislation that makes it legal to murder an abortion doctor
4. At the Federal level, Republicans have a bill that allows a woman to die rather than perform a life-saving abortion
5. At the Federal level, Republicans continue to propose all funding to Planned Parenthood be cut
6. At the Federal level, Republicans support the Blunt Amendment, allowing ANY employer to deny coverage for contraception for ANY reason, religious or moral
But the BIG ONE, in my opinion, in the war on women is all of the above wrapped in the context of Romney's support for tax cuts for the wealthy. Women are apparently expected to suck it up and just and take all of these financial assaults on them for the sake of maintaing a low tax rate for the very wealthy. Ann Romney supports her husband, and he supports these policies emphatically and loudly.
So I can picture Ann Romney sitting there listening to the concerns of women, presumably women who would count themselves as Republican or Republican-leaning. And I'm quite sure she's sympathetic - she seems like a nice person. But that begs the question: is she either dumb, or delusional? Because if she sympathizes with these women - even though she can't really relate to them or their day-to-day financial concerns - she can't possibly support her husband's positions.
In a way, her scratch-the-surface, "Women tell me they are worried about the economy", head-in-the-sand behavior reminds me of George HW Bush during the 1992 election cycle. In his heart, I'm sure GHWB felt compassionate about the plight of the working person (well, maybe not - but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt). But he was utterly tone-deaf - divorced from what was really happening to real people in the trenches. I see Ann Romney in the same light - because it's impossible to believe that she's both sympathetic AND simultaneously support of her husband and his party.
Ann Romney's luxurious CHOICE to not work outside of the home and stay at home to raise her children is one that so many women would like to have. And there are likely women out there who are at least able to put food on the table and get their children healthcare while working only ONE job (as opposed to two or three) because of the very programs Romney's husband is so keen on eviscerating. Her tone deafness here is actually breathtaking.
So Ann Romney, you rock on with your bad self. No, Hilary Rosen shouldn't have spoken about the fact that you don't work outside of the home in the way she did. But it doesn't obscure the larger point: For sucha pro-family person in word and in deed, you sure are supporting some seriously anti-women and anti-family proposals.
Are you even aware?
The Republican War on Women is real. One verbal mis-step by one unaffiliated commentator isn't going to change that, and women know it.