Can Any Man Empower the Community of Women?

[McCamy Taylor]

Trick question. By definition, a community---a neighborhood, a religious group or the community of women---can only be empowered from within.

From the WHO on Community Empowerment:

'Empowerment' refers to the process by which people gain control over the factors and decisions that shape their lives. It is the process by which they increase their assets and attributes and build capacities to gain access, partners, networks and/or a voice, in order to gain control. "Enabling" implies that people cannot "be empowered" by others; they can only empower themselves by acquiring more of power's different forms (Laverack, 2008). It assumes that people are their own assets, and the role of the external agent is to catalyse, facilitate or "accompany" the community in acquiring power.

http://www.who.int/healthpromotion/conferences/7gchp/track1/en/

Believe it or not, this empowerment from within is a revolutionary concept.Once upon a time, people in the more affluent countries imagined that they could bestow enlightenment, happiness, health, wealth on others less unfortunate than themselves. They would do this, they claimed, by taking control of their lives. As a result, we got King Leopold of Belgium's genocide in the Congo, in which African villages were decimated, men, women and children murdered in cold blood and mutilated--hands were chopped off the living by hired thugs who were required to show their Belgian masters a hand for every bullet used. All lands were appropriated by the crown, all natives of the Congo were required to work 25 days of each month collecting rubber to be given to the crown for essentially no payment---except the privilege of being allowed to live. Maybe. If the Belgian masters were in a good mood.

This did not start out as the rape and plunder of the Congo. A Congress of European leaders got together and divided up Africa among themselves, vowing to civilize the continent. Go here to read Conan Doyle describing one of the worst genocides in modern history:

http://www.kongo-kinshasa.de/dokumente/lekture/crime_of_congo.pdf

What happens when the "betters" decide to take care of those they have formerly oppressed? At best, the formerly oppressed are less fearful. However, they are still beggars at the banquet of life. They are still the children waiting for Santa Claus to decide who was naughty and who was nice, bestowing gifts on the "good" little children and lumps of coal on the "bad" ones.

Here is Angela Davis on the empowerment of communities:

Even as Nelson Mandela always insisted that his accomplishments were collective—also achieved by the men and women who were his comrades—the media attempted to sanctify him as a heroic individual. A similar process has attempted to dissociate Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. from the vast numbers of women and men who constituted the very heart of the mid-twentieth-century US freedom movement. It is essential to resist the depiction of history as the work of heroic individuals in order for people today to recognize their potential agency as a part of an ever-expanding community of struggle.

http://www.thenation.com/article/qa-angela-davis-black-power-feminism-and-prison-industrial-complex/

Someone else understands that the village is more important than its chief----or its stock market index.

Speak­ing at Geor­getown Uni­versity on Thursday, Clin­ton ad­dressed wo­men’s eco­nom­ic em­power­ment.
She told a story about a trip she made to In­dia with a group of eco­nom­ists. Clin­ton said she no­ticed many wo­men were work­ing in the street mar­kets or haul­ing wa­ter.
“How do you eval­u­ate wo­men’s con­tri­bu­tions to the eco­nomy?” she re­called ask­ing. One eco­nom­ist re­spon­ded that they didn’t be­cause women don’t par­ti­cip­ate in the form­al eco­nomy.
“What would hap­pen if wo­men stopped work­ing in the in­form­al eco­nomy?” Clin­ton asked, and sug­ges­ted that the eco­nomy would screech to a halt.
“Well, yes, that is a point,” the eco­nom­ist replied. The Geor­getown audi­ence laughed at the an­ec­dote.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/2014/10/30/Where-Hillary-Clinton-Is-Most-Her-Element

It takes a woman to see that so called women's work---caring for elderly relatives, raising children, visiting the sick--is essential to the function of our society and the economy. Until those who make and enforce the laws are able to see the economy from a woman's perspective, women's work will be undervalued, women will be denied the tools they need to perform their many, varied duties. Women who move into so called "male" roles will be praised, while those who continue to perform necessary "women's work" will be marginalized.

Ask yourself, if the ones who care for the elderly had more of a say in how things are done, would the elderly receive better care? If the ones who care for children had a say in how things are done, would so many of our children live in poverty? If mothers had more power, would so many young women find that motherhood is the first step to lifelong poverty?

Women are an extremely powerful resource for global entrepreneurship and economic development — one that is not currently tapped to its potential. Research has shown that where women are economically empowered, communities and nations thrive.

snip

In 2011, for example, the State Department held the first Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Women and the Economy Summit, a breakthrough forum in San Francisco on the economic empowerment of women where we hosted 21 of the world's economies — including China, Russia, and Indonesia — that represented 55 percent of the world's GDP.

At the forum, Secretary Clinton persuaded the countries to agree to the "San Francisco Declaration" — an agenda to integrate female economic empowerment and entrepreneurship into their economic policies. It declared that the countries "will take concrete actions to realize the full potential of women, integrate them more fully into APEC economies, harness their talents, remove barriers that restrict women's full economic participation, and maximize their contributions towards economic growth.

http://www.cnbc.com/2014/09/18/empowering-women-is-good-for-the-economycommentary.html

I am tired of waiting for Mr. Good President. I think it is time that my sisters and I take a seat at the table.

[McCamy Taylor]

2. Oh man! A great reply got self deleted. And I was ready to respond.

Here is what I was going to say:

You live in a world where "gender" is not an "issue"?

Give me directions. I would love to visit.

Did you say the same thing to Obama's Black supporters in 2008? You know, "Some might get the idea that issues are less important to you than the race of your candidate"? What kind of response did you get when you asked that question?

[Agschmid]

24. Such a post fail huh?

Sometimes...

[Warren DeMontague]

3. by that logic, how can Hillary Clinton be the candidate of empowering African Americans?

I mean, she's white.

[Live and Learn]

5. +1 nt

[ohheckyeah]

7. 52% of Afro Americans

are women. Hillary is a woman. What have white male politicians done for black males or females?

[Warren DeMontague]

8. Wouldnt it make more sense to have an African American woman, then?

Your question doesnt make any sense.

Bill Clinton is still held in high regard by the AA community, in fact it's one of the reasons of-touted by Hillary supporters that her numbers with them will remain unshakeable.

Bill Clinton being both white AND male, the fiend.

[ohheckyeah]

10. Is there a black woman

running that I don't know about?

I didn't think so and my question makes perfect sense.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. No, you're just sort of arbitrarily juggling the standards and moving the goalposts

because it's gotta be Hillary because it's gotta be Hillary because it's gotta be Hillary.

And it's her turn, amirite?

Yeah, I get it.

I'd love to see a woman in the White House- Liz Warren would be awesome- but that's hardly the only factor. Carly Fiorina may end up on the GOP ticket, I'm sure you don't want her. Or Michelle Bachman. Or Sarah Palin. Women, all.

And again, you asked when a White Man has done anything for POC- does that negate all the noise I keep hearing about the unshakeable Clinton 'brand loyalty' that community supposedly has? Was Bill Clinton not a white dude?

[ohheckyeah]

12. I didn't say it was her turn.

Hillary is, as of now, the only Democratic female running and I am ready for a Democratic female president. I like Elizabeth Warren but she's not running.

I'm not responsible for what other Clinton supporters say and I haven't said any of those things.

[Warren DeMontague]

16. And she may still end up being the nominee, in which case I will support her.

I was more enthusiastic about the prospect a month or two ago, before it became apparent that she was going to run a campaign even more craptastically lame than I had feared she would.

I had hoped she would have learned something from the last time around, so far it appears all she's learned is to dig up an even worse batch of high-priced beltway advisors to feed her terrible advice.

Not just me saying it, it seems a number of folks have gotten that impression.

Good news is, she's certainly got time to turn it around, but from where I sit it would require doing everything her political DNA is programmed NOT to do- take wonky stands on potentially controversial issues, ditch the "branding" and "image promotion" and actually start leading with some concrete answers on what she wants to do as President, which is, after all, the job she's applying for here.


But getting back to the OP- the (fallacious, I think) logic at its core says "a community---a neighborhood, a religious group or the community of women---can only be empowered from within." That's a quote, from the 1st paragraph.

If that logic is applied consistently, Hillary Clinton can't "empower" the AA community, because she's not African American.

Pretty simple.

[ohheckyeah]

17. And I think she could help

empower 52% of the black community. I don't agree that empowerment can only be done from the inside - it probably helps though.

I will support the Democratic nominee unless Trump switches parties. (Yes, that was just a lame joke.)

[beam me up scottie]

15. +1000

The logic is not strong in this one Luke.

[mhatrw]

4. Maggie Thatcher can.

[Live and Learn]

6. Of course, they can. Do you think women got any of the rights they

now have without getting some men in their corner? Do you think all women empower other women? This is a ridiculous premise.

[Control-Z]

13. When was the last time you were a woman?

How can you possibly understand how it works - unless you're helping to make it work?

[Live and Learn]

22. The last time I checked. Not that it is any of your business. nt

[sibelian]

9. "So called" women's work...

How do you get "only women can understand it" AND "it's ridiculous to think of it as a female-only process" in the same sentence?

[beam me up scottie]

14. I was just going to say the same thing!

[coolepairc]

18. Good points

I do agree with this but do not want Hillary as our President, sorry. I've noticed two big changes in my political outlook of late. First, I simply cannot stand male privilege. And I don't just mean of the white upper class sort. I mean all sorts. Everywhere I look I see selfish men that take as much as they can for as long as they can, economically, racially, sexually, everything-ally. Patriarchy is brutal and violent. Violent masculinity is something that is simply not discussed in the US. Q: Who commits violent crimes? A: Men*. Q: Who carries out mass shootings? A: Men*. Q: Who thinks war and bravado and ego are solutions not causes of our problems. A: Men*.

Then there's the matter of the asterisk. And this is where gender and identity politics can be confusing. The above is mostly true but there are very important exceptions. I think Bernie and Hillary are reverse gender empowering. I don't want an empowered woman that essentially extends the reach of abusive patriarchy to further include women of exceptional privilege. I want greater community, compassion, equality, caring, sharing, love and peace. Yes, I desperately want a woman President, a transformative woman leader in the White House. But that woman is not Hillary.

[djean111]

19. I am honored to agree with you 100%. Thank you.

I think Bernie and Hillary are reverse gender empowering. I don't want an empowered woman that essentially extends the reach of abusive patriarchy to further include women of exceptional privilege. I want greater community, compassion, equality, love and peace. Yes, I desperately want a woman President, a transformative woman leader in the White House. But that woman is not Hillary.

Exactly!!!!!!!!!

[99Forever]

20. Hogwash.

[ibegurpard]

21. I will leave that to women to decide.

[Autumn]

23. Woman who do that so called women's work are underpaid. One candidate think the minimum wage should

be $15 an hour. Hint, it's not the woman candidate.

[Agschmid]

25. Yet none of them actually pay it...

Weird I know.

[Autumn]

26. Of course not, they complain about paying the low current minimum wage.

[Agschmid]

27. Or even paying at all.

Be nice if people did what they said occasionally huh?

[LondonReign2]

28. Genitalia Type ranks pretty far down my list of qualifications for President

[JackInGreen]

29. Then they can vote for that

In whatever form it takes.
Preferably not the one currently available, but any friendly port in a storm I guess.

[Avalux]

30. Another "vote for Hillary because she's a woman" post. Great!!

You know what I'm tired of? Two things: the misconception that Hillary is going to save us women just because she is one; and being criticized because I am a woman who doesn't support her.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Lord Acton

See Maggie Thatcher and Indira Gandhi for specifics.

[Armstead]

33. So if the Dem nominee is male and Carly Fiorina is the GOP nominee?

That mean you're going to switch just to vote for a woman, even though she may oppose everything else you stand for?