This blog is about the social, political and economic conditions facing women in the 21st Century.  Although it may be of interest to younger generations of men and women, I am writing this blog for American women like me who came of age in the 1960s and 1970s.  Now that we have power, experience, independence, and the wisdom of 40 years of work life, I suggest it is time to examine and correct a number of ‘unintended outcomes’ of the Women’s Rights Movement.  The purpose of this discussion is toward a richer personal and professional life for women today and for our future generations.

My transition from a teenage girl to a young adult woman during the late ’60s and early ’70s was significantly impacted by the social unrest of the Civil Rights Movement, the desperate years of the Vietnam War, and the growing freedom of the counter-culture of the 1960s.  However, it was my radical collision with the institutionalization phase of the Women’s Rights Movement (‘the Movement’) in the early 1970s that took my life in a different direction from my long-held adolescent dream of having a family and a career as a high school teacher.  For me, the alternate life path I chose – with much encouragement and support from my female friends – didn’t produce the optimal outcome in my 40s and 50s predicted by the Movement at the outset.  I’ve thought long and hard about writing a blog that discusses the sub-optimal ‘unintended outcomes’ of the Movement.  And, here we go.

Today, I am 62, hold three degrees (BS, MBA, PhD) and am an activist for disability rights.  I am creative and happy.  However, over the years I have noticed an emerging discontent with a number of social, political and economic conditions that arose out of the Movement and may be in need of correction.  Among the social issues are relationships between men and women, and the current view of working women vs stay-at-home mothers. Political issues include equality and well-being in the workplace, the role of women in globalization, and the current perception of feminist power.  On an economic level, the foundations and future of the two-income household and our relationship to consumerism and debt are significant issues that have arisen out of women entering the workforce in greater numbers.

I’m not going to pull any punches here.  I want this blog to be honest, provocative and inciting.  I want polarized discussion.  From the time of my first women’s movement meeting in 1972, I have been speaking out about the radical strategies implemented by the Movement as non-sustainable.  I have offered that the social, political and economic structures advocated at the beginning of the Movement did not include broad enough freedoms for a woman to make personal decisions about her life and the long-term health and well-being of the men and children in it.  I challenged that it would not lead to the economic security for women that the Movement promised.

I spoke out during the Clinton presidency at women’s forums sponsored by the Treasury Department regarding the continued lack of broad support for women’s personal lifestyle decisions – in the 90s!  And, I’m speaking out now, 20 years later, because not that much has changed.  I contend that the radical Movement of the 1960s and 1970s achieved notable and necessary gains, but requires ongoing analysis and ‘correction’ to ensure the structures it advocates optimize long-term sustainable well-being for individuals, families, and communities.  And those corrections are overdue.  My PhD research in Family Enterprise Management examined cases of women who made the decision 30 years ago to start full-time businesses with their husbands – as equals – rather than to enter the workforce outside the home. I will discuss those findings in later postings.

My next blog will get into the thick of the economic issues I consider to be ‘unintended outcomes’ and counter-productive to ensuring women achieve financial security in life.  But first, let me tell you why I called this blog ‘Queens of Earth’ and my perspective on why we need a powerful but gentle correction to the platform originally formulated to guide the path to greater rights for women.

One afternoon in 1972 at the age of 19, I was sitting at a table at the student union at the University of Kansas with my boyfriend.  His two male roommates were there, along with two women who had invited me to attend several women’s rights meetings during the previous month.  We had all been social friends for several years and were part of a large community of men and women we considered ‘extended family.’  We lived in communal homes and had built a close group of men and women who respected each other.  I never felt discriminated against.  I had two male ‘best friends’ who loved me.  I had women friends who were as close as sisters.

One of the men paid me a compliment that went something like this… “You are one interesting babe!”  In case you’re wondering, I was a ‘babe.’  I was often told I looked like Ali McGraw.  I had waist-length hair and dressed in embroidered jeans, flowing skirts and silver jewelry.  I loved to dance and laugh and hug my friends.  I was also the ‘Queen of My World.’  I felt empowered and on the road to becoming a loving, strong young adult.

That was the last day I remember feeling truly free to be myself in front of my female friends.  The two women – who I knew and respected – launched into a lecture about how the word ‘babe’ was no longer acceptable.  They pontificated that we were WOMEN and nothing less.  I remember protesting that I wasn’t offended at all.  Their response was that if I were educated, I would understand how offended I should be by this.  I didn’t share their opinion, but it was clear I wasn’t going to change their minds.  I felt at the time a sense of the damage that could occur in our relationships with men if we handled these social issues with anger, dogmatic sermons and an institutionalized Movement that encouraged women to exercise their power to decide, but only along party lines.  I was concerned this tactic would shut down our social communication with responsible men and close doors we didn’t really want – or need – to close.  And, I really didn’t want to be known as just a “woman.”  I wanted to be a Queen (the most powerful piece on the chess board; the most beautiful card in the deck; the most compassionate ruler; the most noble voice of reason).  And on that day, my perception of myself started to change in subtle ways that have had unintended negative outcomes along the way.  I feel a strong need at this point in my life to rigorously and passionately discuss these outcomes.  I didn’t want to lead the world with a group of women trying to institutionalize feminist power.  I wanted to rule the Earth with my Sister Queens.

So, I am taking back the word I associated with the beautiful, free-spirited, powerful, creative, smart, and desirable woman I was becoming before I was no longer allowed to hear men use it to describe me.  I choose to be a babe with a PhD, a Queen of the Earth.  It’s where my power lies and I want to reclaim it.  I want to own it again.

I am certainly not advocating that the Women’s Rights Movement wasn’t necessary and beneficial or that language isn’t discriminatory when it is used to offend.  But I took issue, then and now, with preempting the natural communication that arises between men and women by stripping it of fun and romance.  Was this an intended outcome?  Or has it now put a distance between us that is sub-optimal in the natural process of male-female relationships?  And has it restricted our joint right to meet and fall in love in the workplace, where we spend most of our waking hours and where an intelligent woman can be seen and heard? Do we really want men to approach us with all these rules in their heads — or do we want them to come with truth in their hearts and the politically incorrect awkwardness that sometimes is the thing that endears them to us at the outset? Isn’t it better to empower women to speak up if they are offended, and to be supported by other women if they aren’t.  Isn’t that what choice is all about?

I’m glad I have the right to say it’s OK for men to call me a ‘babe,’ just as it’s OK for other women to say it isn’t.  I have the Movement to thank for that and for the freedom to start this conversation with you.  You’re welcome to weigh in on other terms of reference, including ‘honey, sweetie, darling, sugar, doll’ or any other names, past or present.  I personally liked being called ‘the most intelligent chick in the room’ – but that’s just me.

I welcome your comments and discussion.