International Women's Day

International Women’s Day came about as a result of the Socialist Movement in Europe, Russia and the suffragist movement in the United States. In 1910 at a Socialist conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, there was a proposal to officially commemorate an International Women’s Day. On the threshold of World War I, Russian women activists came out to the streets protesting for ‘peace and bread.’ Later in 1917 at the height of the Great October Revolution women organized mass demonstrations demanding the right to vote and asking the Czar to abdicate. The famous women’s strike commenced on February 23 on the calendar then in use in Russia, which is March 8 on the calendar elsewhere in the world. (visit)

This day is very personal to me. Growing up in the Soviet Union, March 8 was a national holiday of first importance and we had parades with flower shows on the squares of our cities. I remember very vividly the sense of pride of women on this day. Men, women and children like me were walking with large posters with international symbols of peace and solidarity. With the Cold War a reality, longing for peace was enormous. It was this international spirit that made me want to be a world citizen. I was born on March 10, 1978. But when my father went to the county office to get my birth certificate, he recorded my birthday as March 8 to have it associated with International Women’s Day. All my formal documents reflect that. I see a symbolic meaning in this. If throughout my life I make a significant contribution to international women’s rights, my life will be fulfilled.


For centuries in almost all cultures throughout the world women were severely marginalized and minimized to the role of a housewife and mother. While many tribal and pre-Roman societies were matriarchal and centered around women, that rapidly changed with the advance of the Roman law and its influence in the world. Women were perceived as completely lacking in intelligence. They were not allowed access to higher education beyond the education received at home even in the nobility. You see, their minds were too frail and they were not seen as capable of mastering sciences and arts. Any ambitious woman who set up goals for her advancement had to become a mistress to a famous man to reach them. Fortunate were those born to kings. As queens they were allowed to rule over men by Grace of God. They were divinities, not simple women. Otherwise who would have followed their orders? There were those who surpassed kings in their rule. Cleopatra, Catherine the Great of Russia, Elizabeth I of England were such. But until the end of the 19th century women were largely invisible and voiceless. Exceptionally talented women would shine like lone stars in the darkness of the night and again submerge into darkness, forgotten and rendered to oblivion. Grace O’Malley was one. But with growing industrialization at the threshold of the 20th century women began awakening from deep subjugation and slumber. Because the industrialization touched the West more forcefully than other parts of the world, women’s emancipation movement also began in the West. Women’s suffragist movement that bestowed the right to vote was an essential beginning. Till then women were not privileged to participate or contribute to the civic society except for by charitable work or patronage. This was a crucial threshold that women of the West crossed. Of course, we should also recognize that socialism with its basic egalitarian principles made a significant contribution to women’s rights. Therefore, countries with socialism as political ideology made similar progress in women’s rights. Slowly, step by step, but surely women marched on in the 20th century, acknowledging, defying, and breaking barriers. First treated as non-conformists and rebels these women were going to set new standards for the newer generations of women. Lucille Ball and Katherine Hepburn come to mind. Things they fought hard for day in and day out were already taken for granted by those of us who followed. For us, women lawyers it is simply inconceivable that there was a time, not long ago, when women were simply not found in law schools. Those who began breaking this rule were treated with ridicule and sexism.

So here we are today. For us, fortunate women in the West and some other regions, most of the barriers are no longer a reality. We are no longer perceived as intellectually inferior to men, or subordinate to them. While there are still subtle and invisible to the eye barriers and sexism is still existent, we cannot compare our condition to that of our foremothers. Yet, yet, in a large part of the world women are still mistreated, disrespected, viewed as inferior at best. At worst they are sold, abused daily, raped, as easy targets of violence. Their suffering is enormous. They take the biggest hit of poverty, economic degradation, cultural and tribal backwardness. We, women in the West, who are fortunate to have achieved so much by virtue of high development of our countries, have a responsibility to render a helping hand to these women across the Globe who are less fortunate. Women in Africa, Asia, Middle East are those in need of our help. Powerless as they are, they only need our guidance and inspiration to arise because they have all the determination, strength and maturity that characterized women suffragists in the West and those Russian women activists. The UN and human rights institutions have done a lot but it is not enough, because the suffering of women all around the world is continuing daily, hourly and by minute.


To me International Women’s Day is a day of realization of the high responsibility of all women in the world in standing up for one another. Women’s rights cannot materialize and be enforced in societies if women all around the world are inactive. On this day, I would therefore like to give a tribute to a woman who has dedicated her life and career to arousing this great sense of responsibility in other women—my favorite Professor at UC Davis School of Law, Madhavi Sunder. (here) Graduate of Harvard and Stanford, she came to teach at a very young age, feeling the sense of urgency in development of women’s rights around the globe. Her scholarship is devoted to rejecting old-fashioned, settled norms about women and culture, women and religion, women and modernity. She has courageously crossed the high threshold towards new thinking, new ‘enlightenment’ that gives new impetus to women’s rights and prepares all the essential groundwork for advancement of women in the Middle East, Asia and Africa. A distinguished Carnegie scholar, an author of numerous brilliant articles and an upcoming book, she is a superb role model for us. As an affectionate mother of two children and a wife she is a role model not only as a scholar and champion for women, but as a well-rounded woman successful in all roles. Congratulations to Professor Madhavi Sunder!
Happy International Women’s Day!

Grace O'Malley

Having read “The True Story of Grace O’Malley” by Anne Chambers I threw up my hands. I thought it was all fiction... Yet, it is a true story!

Granuaile (anglicized Grace O'Malley) was born in approximately 1530 in Gaelic Ireland. A daughter of a well-known seafarer, she was to become his ‘son’ in the image of a woman when she begged and achieved to come on board of the ship with him—unheard of for women of those times. That was the beginning of her career. A famous seafarer, notorious pirate and plunderer, shrewd politician, a captain and commander-in-chief of a sophisticated army of men who passionately followed her to their deathbeds, she rebelled against all gender roles and usurped and surpassed the men’s role turning into an anathema for the powerful men of the times.

She seemed well used to power, as one that hath
Dominion over men of savage mood…

The charisma, power and courage of this woman are exemplified in myriads of folktales handed down to us through hundreds of years. Because of long-lived sexism she was not even mentioned in the historical annals and her story reached us only thanks to the folktales and original parchments of state papers. This itself lends credence to the legend that she is. The Queen of the pirates, she was equal to the very Queen Elizabeth of England, whom she personally met and impressed.

An account of this meeting further reveals her character. During the meeting she needed a handkerchief and Elizabeth gave hers. Upon using it, Granuaile threw it into a nearby fireplace. To the rebuke of the Queen that it was supposed to be put in her pocket, Granuaile told her that in her country they had a higher standard of cleanliness. Another story shows how unrelenting she was. During a battle, her son lost courage and hid behind her for safety. She turned to him in anger, “Are you trying to hide behind my backside, the place you came from?”

She was an object of admiration, exaltation but also of awe, fear and revulsion. Personally leading her men to battle, she was fierce and instilled much fear in the chieftains.

… dared the tempest in its midnight wrath
And through opposing billows cleft her fearless path.

Lord Justice Drury said about her, 'Chief Commander and Director of thieves and murderers at sea.' But she called it ‘maintenance by sea and land.’ Twice married to notable chieftains, she was never a Mrs. Maid, and was fully independent, excelling her husbands in war, seafaring and politics. Her legend received a deep political dimension because of the turbulent times she lived in and the role she played. Subjugation of Gaelic Ireland-- sheltered from Renaissance and divided into tribes and clans-- by a more sophisticated and modernized England was set in motion. In the midst of this tempest and fire she was to play a unique role of a woman rebel, but also a pragmatist devoid of nationalism or patriotism. Survival as her innermost instinct, she was known ‘as the nurse of all rebellions,’ but also sought and achieved protection of the Queen to continue her trade in exchange for loyalty to the Queen.

Captured and locked in castles a few times by her male foes, she escaped the execution by miracle and survived to live for almost 70 years. The fact that she could persuade the Queen, her adversary, to protect her points to her incredible political talent. Perhaps, the similarities between these two women contributed to it. Grace O'Malley was listed as the only woman political leader in Ireland of her times. But while the Queen ruled by the Divine Will, Grace O'Malley ruled by her personal will and the power of her own sword. As one editor described her, “… the original trail-blazer and mould-breaker. It is only now that women were beginning to achieve in politics, business and in the maritime field, the goal set for them four hundred years ago by Grace O’Malley.”

Truly, the story of this woman makes me wonder about the true potential of a human being and whether after all, there are any limits to it. The reason that traditionally women were always portrayed as inferior to men is perhaps a result of the hidden fear of this potential. The women in the West have come a long way, but most women in the rest of the world are still suffering from this long-standing prejudice and have not yet been able to march forth with full swing. I only wish more women in the world set their ships into the freedom of the ocean, fearlessly and with no regard to culture, religion and law, just like Grace O’Malley.

Gone with the wind...

Similar to "War and Peace" by Sergei Bondarchuk as the best historic movie in Russia, the "Gone with the Wind" is the best historic movie made in America. In fact, it was on this day, on December 15, 1939 in Atlanta that we had its first premier. Based on the novel by Margaret Mitchell (1900-1949) who won the Pulitzer prize for it, it was the first color movie to win the Oscar. Margaret Mitchell had some biographical inspiration behind the love story of Scarlett and Rhett. She was in love with her college classmate, but was deprived of happiness when he died in WWI.

The making of this movie cost $3.7 million of dollars (which would be $41 million today). The movie theater was decorated as the Mansion of O'Hara with the picture of Vivien Leigh and Clark Gable. Is there any more romantic and sad love story than that? There is a fine line between hatred and passionate love... Unless taken care of and cherished daily, love dies like a flower and bringing it back is almost impossible... True love can survive time and all obstacles if only it is fired by constant reciprocal passion...

Is there also a better dramatization of the US Civil War than that? Perhaps, it was the strongest anti-war movie ever made. Of course, the cataclysmic moment in the movie is when Scarlett O'Hara shouts in the barren field 'I'll never be hungry again!' Some argue that it is a racist movie because it portrays the slaves as intellectually deprived and silly. I do not like some of the scenes in the movie that assume that. Insofar as the book/movie tends to romanticize the South with its moral depravity and regressiveness inherent in anti-abolition and white supremacism (KKK), it has its shortcomings. But remember, this was still the early 1900s. Abolition aside, white supremacy was pervasive in all of the United States, not only in the South, up through the 60s and the Civil Rights Era. In addition, the anti-war sentiments are always attacked as insensitive to the race issue, since the War ultimately freed the slaves.

It is really one of the best movies on women's emancipation. Scarlett is the epitome of a strong woman, who is capable of surviving-- her utmost instinct-- by overcoming many of the customs of the Deep South. A Southern belle, who is not expected to do anything else but to marry and bear and educate children, transforms into a businesswoman, a powerful woman who can in fact define her own destiny. Then she also sexually awakens and comes to a realization of her body's wishes. There are many interesting transformations that occur with her that show that she is still in the 'process' of changing... Of course, she is far from perfect and not the role model for today's women. But 19th century women began many of the inner transformations that were continued by women through the 20th. Interestingly, Scarlett is hated by most in the society. That is the fate of strong and extraordinary women of all times!

I am never tired of watching this movie...

Awakening

Kate Chopin (Katherine O'Flaherty)(1850-1904) was born in St. Louis, Missouri on February 8, 1850. She is considered the forerunner of feminist literature of the 19th century. Her "Awakening" is perhaps one of the best books ever written on women's inner emancipation and liberation.

Edna Pontellier, the fictional heroine in the book, awakens first sexually but then altogether as a woman and a human being and throws off the chains of the society. Fatally, since her husband and the society were unable to accept that, her liberation was also her death. At the end, she strips herself of all clothes and gives in to the waves of the ocean.

Could she have survived in that society? Was the society going to allow her walk freely and without bending to their rules and conventions? She was treated as valuable property by her husband... Yet, when she fell in love with someone else, her lover also treated her as her 'husband's' property and left her... Heartbroken, she had nowhere to go. That is why, her liberation was also her death. She was either to die in freedom and naked, or live in chains and covered with heavy robes...

While today the reality is much different, women still are in many chains, some self-imposed and some imposed by the male-dominated world. While they can put down the self-imposed ones and walk into the world, free and strong, the other chains are harder to put down... Prejudice and artificial barriers are closing many gates for women's entrance. Those who dare to be different and independent are disliked and condemned and are considered 'weird.' Strong women, women outside the box who challenge the norms and principles of the society, more often than not earn enemies and widespread badmouthing. Even women themselves are treacherous to one another and rarely support one another.
Competition and envy among themselves are some of the self-imposed chains...

Edna Pontellier had other 'co-heroines'. Madame Bovary (by Gustave Flaubert (1821-1880)) and Anna Karenina (Leo Tolstoy's, 1828-1910)) come to mind. The difference is that the latter were created by males, who while sympathetic, were not altogether free of criticism of their protagonists.


Women of the 19th century are gone forever. But they forged the path for those who came after them, in the 20th century and today... While we have come a long way since then, the path is still full of broken debris and treacherous dark holes...

(This painting of a Lady in Blue was painted by a great English painter, Thomas Gainsborough (1727-1788)).

Fearless-- that is what we are!

On November 2, 1938 for the first time Russian women were awarded the title of Hero of USSR. On the morning of September 24, 1938 Soviet pilots Valentina Grizodubova, Polina Osipenko and Marina Raskova, took up a non-stop flight from Moscow to the Far East on a two-engine plane for a total distance of 5908 km. During the flight the plane began freezing. The crew had to wear oxygen masks and endure freezing temperature. At some point, the radiostation went silent and the plane lost communication from below. Trying to make a landing at a nearest possible location, the fuel ran out and engine shut off. Grizobudova ordered Raskova to jump out on a parachute. The plane fell on a bog after being in air for 26 hours and 29 minutes. For more.

We, women, are capable of much more that the world is yet to find out!

Women and baseball...

Women have played organized baseball since the 1860s. Students at the all-female Vassar College formed baseball teams as early as 1866. In 1875 three men organized a women's baseball club in Springfield, Illinois, divided it into two teams, the Blondes and the Brunettes, and charged admission to see them play. In the early 20th century, barnstorming teams known as “Bloomer Girls” were formed in various parts of the United States and took on amateur and semiprofessional teams that included both men and women.

In its early stages, women's involvement in professional baseball was largely an attempt to profit from the novelty of female players. An Ohio woman, Alta Weiss, pitched for the otherwise all-male semiprofessional Vermilion Independents in 1907. Jackie Mitchell (1914-1987) (above) became the first female professional baseball player when she signed a contract with the minor league Chattanooga Lookouts in 1931 (she was really the second because in 1898 Lizzie Arlington played one game, pitching for Reading against Allentown). Mitchell pitched in an exhibition game against the New York Yankees and struck out their two star players, Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig. Organized baseball formally banned women from signing professional contracts with men's teams in 1952.

When World War II made the suspension of major league baseball a possibility, the All-American Girls Professional Baseball League (AAGPBL) was founded with four teams—the Rockford (Illinois) Peaches, the Racine Belles and the Kenosha Comets (both of Wisconsin), and the South Bend (Indiana) Blue Sox. Annastasia Batikis ("Stash") played at Racine Belles.

The AAGPBL drew large crowds because of its players' athletic abilities. The league management, however, was concerned that the players appear feminine to the fans, and rules encouraging the wearing of lipstick and long hair and banning the wearing of trousers off the field were promulgated. On the field, the women initially played fast-pitch softball (which features a larger ball and underhand pitching), but by 1948 overhand pitching was introduced, and eventually the only difference of note between men's baseball and AAGPBL baseball was the size of the diamond, which in the AAGPBL had a shorter distance between bases. During its 11-year existence (1943–54), the league received a great deal of national attention, but by the 1950s the televising of major league baseball led to dwindling interest in the women's teams, and the league folded. These female players were eventually recognized with an exhibit at the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum in 1988. In 1992 the feature film A League of Their Own dramatized the story of the AAGPBL.

Beginning in 1994, the Colorado Silver Bullets, sponsored by a brewing company and managed by Hall of Fame pitcher Phil Niekro, competed against men's teams for four years. Between 1997 and 2000 Ila Borders, a left-handed pitcher, played for two men's teams in the independent Northern League.

For more on women in baseball read the book by Gregorich.
Sports was one of the ways that women began assailing the traditional outdated notions about femininity and manliness. It was indeed a powerful venue because how else women could visibly prove that they were equal to men...

Women and secularism

“What a man believes, and what he therefore regards as unquestionable reality, constitutes his religion.” Jose Ortega y Gasset, "Concord and Liberty". “His/her” religion, not everybody’s, because faith is a very intimate endeavor, perhaps the most private human space, after family and sex.

“The government is itself nothing but the self-established focus, the individual embodiment of the universal will.” Hegel, “Phenomenology of Mind.”

The idea of separation of church from state, or secularism has been a center of much debate. It is important to look at its origins in order to understand its true meaning. The Age of Enlightenment (18th century), when laying the foundation for the modern nation-state, promulgated that a state does not represent the Will of God, but the will of people. By its very nature the Enlightenment began the slow extermination of monarchs, who were ruling by grace of God, not by the will of people. In the new formula, the church as the earthly manifestation of God, was to be separate from the state. Moreover, religious scholasticism and mysticism of the Middle Ages were replaced by reason. Enlightenment was synonymous with reason. Thus, the Enlightenment thinkers recognized that the demands of religion/church are incompatible with the demands of the modern state institutions.

As these liberal institutions developed, the idea of separation of church from state deepened and became an integral component of a western liberal democracy. The state was not to establish any religion and was not to abridge free exercise thereof. Also, the state was not to let any church influence its workings. However, an unspoken dilemma was always there. The state is not an abstraction and in its functions, it is empowered by the people it purports to represent. As Hegel pointed out, the government is an embodiment of the will of people. Since religion constitutes an “unquestionable reality” for millions of people, the state is necessarily challenged with respect to religion. Therefore, it can never really and fully insulate itself from religion.

Today while most European states and America preach secularism, they do not follow what they preach. While the institutions such as Constitutions are secular in their formulations, the governments are influenced by religion. It all really revolves around how people understand faith and religion. If you subscribe to the broader definition of Gasset, the vast majority of people can be classified religious, since they all believe in something faithfully and even blindly.

The recent developments in the world have illustrated that things are not as simple as the Enlightenment thinkers envisioned and secularism needs serious review. While in its essence separation of church and state is necessary in many ways, in many others too much of it borders on suppression. Professor Madhavi Sunder called this era as the New Enlightenment (Read her brilliant article "Piercing the Veil"). Her vision is how to recharacterize secularism to serve the needs of religious minorities and first of all, women, who have made certain choices toward emancipation within religion/culture. So, the dichotomy is changing. Faith as it is understood by people, has to receive its redefinition in the state and its representation of people.

For example, when France banned the Muslim headscarf in public schools, Muslim women rebelled against it, “You are suppressing our religious faith. This is intolerance and discrimination under the guise of secularism.” The state had a lame response, “We are a secular state and cannot allow your religious symbols infiltrate the public sphere.” In fact, the real motivation behind the ban was the fear of Islamic fundamentalism and religious fervor. To give some break to the French government, it was really grappling with Islamic women—suicide bombers. Unfortunately, the ban resulted in more fundamentalism and more religious uprisings.

The problem is that while theoretically separation of church from state is a positive thing, it always ends up as a tool for religious discrimination by the majority culture of the minority, or in other situations, it simply turns into a tool to get rid of disfavored minorities. The headscarf for these women was not only a religious symbol, but a part of their cultural identity. France’s ban was to exclude them from the public sphere, or force them to choose rejection of their culture. But why should these women, already oppressed in their own culture, receive more oppression in the hands of a liberal democracy… Moreover, it seems the human rights law itself supports this. The European Court of Human Rights in Leila Sahin v. Turkey decided that Turkey was justified in prohibiting Sahin from wearing her headscarf in the public university.

I cannot pretend to have a ready answer to this dilemma, but it seems the goal should be to empower, rather than shut out these women, who have a right to choose… While Islamic extremism and militantism must be grappled with, I would search for other ways than suppression of religious minorities.

Women in India making inroads...

Women entrepreneurs in India came up with a wonderful idea-- how to teach rural women to run a small enterprise (here). Learning to make money is the path towards independence and social mobility. So, Mann Deshi Mahila Sahakari Bank, a cooperative bank run by women in the Satara district of Maharashtra, in association with the HSBC bank, set up a rural business school for women. The idea came as a result of the questions that women debtors were asking the bank. They were having technical difficulties with running their businesses. The bank owners had a great idea-- why not teach them how to manage and not close their shops. A success story is that of Vanita Jalindar Pise, the winner of the Prime Minister's National 2006 Woman Exemplor Award. She was having a difficulty of running a poultry business. Thanks to this program she learned how to survive and make great progress, now inspiring and teaching others how to run a small business.

In a place where many women are illiterate, this business school has many pragmatic training courses, such as goat-rearing. It is geared towards teaching practical skills for survival in those conditions. It also gives an incentive to learn more and continue with education. Most importantly, it empowers women so that they can take bolder steps towards further emancipation. Successful running of a small enterprise can be a beginning of a great career. Many women lawyers and politicians with non-traditional backgrounds began precisely from that.

We are women and we can do it!

In the famous movie "A League of Their Own" with Tom Hanks, Madonna and Rosie O'Donnell women prove that they can conquer baseball too. In the 20th century the women's emancipation movement gathered pace when women started entering fields traditionally reserved for men. In the 70s women could hardly be found in law schools. Now women comprise a majority in many law schools. Although only 32% of the California Bar is women (see recent Diversity Summit of the Los Angeles California Bar Association), it is still a remarkable progress. The billable hour psychodrama of the big firms is perhaps the biggest challenge for women becoming partners. But in other sections of the profession women have arisen in the hierarchy. More and more women become judges, administrators and supervising attorneys. While the glass ceiling for earnings is still lower for women, they have been able to replace men in virtually every field, while men could hardly ever replace women at home. They have done it and have managed to raise children and be good wives. This has happened not only in the West. In other parts of the world where oppression of women is still a painful reality, women have thrown out their submissive posture and have rebelled. They have demanded respect and independence. More and more Islamic women enter the dialogue on culture, religion and gender roles. For more on this see the amazing work of Professor Madhavi Sunder, a world-class scholar on women's rights. Go girl! We are women and we can do it!