Blogs and Stories
Feminism's Last Line of Defense
In 2007, the Supreme Court upheld a ban on late-term abortions that made no provision for exceptions when a woman’s health is threatened. Clearly outraged, Ginsburg took the unusual step of reading her dissent from the bench. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy made the maddeningly condescending claim that women needed to be protected from a procedure they might later regret. “This way of protecting women recalls ancient notions about women's place in society and under the Constitution—ideas that have long since been discredited,” she wrote.
Later that year, the court voted to limit sex discrimination lawsuits in the Lily Ledbetter case. Once again, there was a cold fury in her dissent, which she again read from the bench: “In our view, the court does not comprehend, or is indifferent to, the insidious way in which women can be victims of pay discrimination.” “[T]his year we are witnessing—what shall we call it?—the radicalization of Ruth Bader Ginsburg?” the columnist Ellen Goodman wrote at the time. “The transformation of the 74-year-old justice who is watching a court undo her life's work?”
Even with Sotomayor to back her up, that undoing will likely continue in the Roberts court. It’s a sad way to wind up a career, seeing one’s legacy eroded. Still, given how public she’s been about her loneliness as the only woman on the bench, at least now she’ll have some company. Hopefully she’ll be able to enjoy it for years to come.
Michelle Goldberg is the author of The Means of Reproduction: Sex, Power and the Future of the World and Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism. She is a senior correspondent for The American Prospect, and her work has appeared in The New Republic, The Nation, the Los Angeles Times, Glamour, and many other publications.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.
10 Power Food Combos
Divya Gugnani is the CEO and founder of BehindtheBurner.com, an emerging culinary media brand that creates expert-based content about food, wine, mixology, and nutrition.
How Barack Beat Bibi
Peter Beinart, senior political writer for The Daily Beast, is associate professor of journalism and political science at City University of New York and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation. His new book, The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris, will be published by HarperCollins in June. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook.
The Sex-Slave Rescuer
Michelle Goldberg is the author of The Means of Reproduction: Sex, Power and the Future of the World and Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism. She is a senior correspondent for The American Prospect, and her work has appeared in The New Republic, The Nation, the Los Angeles Times, Glamour, and many other publications.
Obama Does It Again
Michelle Goldberg is the author of The Means of Reproduction: Sex, Power and the Future of the World and Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism. She is a senior correspondent for The American Prospect, and her work has appeared in The New Republic, The Nation, the Los Angeles Times, Glamour, and many other publications.
The Haiti Fundraising Lie
Michelle Goldberg is the author of The Means of Reproduction: Sex, Power and the Future of the World and Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism. She is a senior correspondent for The American Prospect, and her work has appeared in The New Republic, The Nation, the Los Angeles Times, Glamour, and many other publications.
TK798999
The writer of this article should understand that given how important it is to have women in the seat of power, the writer of this article should have supported Hillary Clinton for President.
Women should support women. Period.
outragedfan
i disagree. women should do as they think and feel is best.
johnnyapplecd
Right. So if Sarah Palin runs against Obama in 2012, you're saying all women should vote for Palin?
vboone
The writer should have supported whoever she wanted to, I guess I should only vote for men because I have a penis too.
johnnyapplecd
Yeah, and I should only for vote for three-nippled, web-toed, 4' tall hunchbacks who-- wait, I've said too much.
irishsnake
>Women should support women. Period.<
So stupid. Phyllis Schlafly is a woman. Would you vote for her as president just because she has girl parts? You PUMA-types are a pox. Take your discredited identity politics and go home.
gak001
I'll join the chorus of individuals saying your statement is absolutely ridiculous. In fact, it's about as anti-feminist a statement as I can think of. The idea is that women are equal to men and should be judged by their ability and the content of their character, not by the chromosomes and sexual organs they happened to be born with.
It's this kind of ill-conceived thinking that hinders the feminist movement and aids its detractors.
GPatton
Like Sarah Palin and Jane Fonda! Sisterhood forever!!!! George Patton
elemcue
It is this insulting thinking that induced McCain to nominate Palin - the idea that any woman will do; that women will blindly accept any woman presented with no analytical thinking about the suitability of that woman.
gloria70
Biology does not equal politics. Feminists should support feminists. Let's remember that 48% of women voted for Prop 8 in California -- what nice solidarity with lesbian sisters. Plenty of men are more progressive on gender issues than women. I'll take Feingold and Franken over Hutchinson and E. Dole any day.
sallyma
Goldberg couldn't suport Hillary. Please. She is Rush-like in her ability to slam women who run for POTUS.
Gloria70 my guess is you are too set in your ways to support a female. The ability to vote for imperfect males over and over again as you demand perfection from female candidates is just plain sad, in my view. But that is what living and breathing patriarchy will do you. Establishment Blues has got ur shoes!
sallyma
Yesss!!!!!!!!! Goldberg is all talk no action when it comes to feminism.
Goldberg is SO yesterday, too busy drinking from the cool hopey cup and chasing Mr Big to support women for power! Leave it real feminists to support women. Goldberg is the effete generation of Third Wave Lipstick feminists who now do more to hurt women than help them. I am a big fan of the Fourth Wave, e.g., The New Agenda, FemiSex, Reclusive Leftist, 4th Wave, Uppity Woman, etc. They get it: women first!
Tango121
"Her voice is especially necessary now, at a time when, thanks to George W. Bush's nominees, the Supreme Court has become the branch of government most hostile to gender equality."
This is code speak for she has voted to overturn standing law, 250 years of legal precedent and the constitution. As she did when she voted in Kelo vs. City of New London. Yes, we can hope she is the last of her kind. Maybe her replacement will follow precedent and constitution and not her own plans for what she wants the country to look like.
Aranxa
Roberts has overturned more precedent, more quickly then Ginsburg ever could. Brown vs Board of Ed was gone before he and Alito got their robes back from the dry cleaners.
Maggie2
Re the comment about women should vote for women, I would like to say that I would never cast a vote for Sarah Palin..never ! This kind of idiocy is what is causing the GOP to become a cancer on the body politic. As for Justice Ginsburg, I for one, think she is, despite the disgusting comment from Tango121, one of the finest members of the court.
Tango121
As all irrational people do, Maggie2 had to attack my beliefs, as it was difference than hers. I agree the leadership of the GOP are Idiots. I for one am not a Repub. and nor would I be one. I vote for the best person whatever the party. Would you Maggie2 tell me the best example when Mrs. Ginsburg made a decision on standing law (not new law coming before the SC for the first time) and she used legal precedent and the constitution to make it. I used Kelo vs. City of New London to show when she didn't.
torodad
Excuse me. What is irrational about attacking someone's beliefs, if you have deep reservations about them?
Am I to assume that *you* see things the way they are, but *the rest of us* see things the way we are?
If so, could you advise us how we might come by some of your omniscience?
kansasrefugee
I agree with torodad. Who do you think you are Tango121?
neverlate
Ginsburg is even more of a dingbat than Pelosi.
torodad
Just a suggestion. When you have nothing worthwhile to add to the discussion, why make a comment?
Or do you enjoy identifying yourself as a partisan dunce?
neverlate
I just thought a simple statement of fact would be a refreshing change for TDB. And my statement is non-partisan. The two of them make Palin look like a genius, something I thought impossible.
kansasrefugee
A "simple statement of fact" from a simple mind, perhaps. I don't think anyone can make Palin look smart (except maybe you for your silly post). I wanted to give her a chance but there's not much depth of learning there. You need to be educated to be successful in politics.
DevilsLawyer
kansasrefugee I agree with the sentiment, but I don't know if your final assertion holds up empirically. American politics gave the world GWB, after all.
kansasrefugee
DevilsLawyer - Yes, W did win the Presidency twice but he's now I believe commonly regarded as the worst President in American history and has been shunned even by his own party.
He is educated (he has an undergrad degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard). He did apparently use his business degree in running the WH much like a business which had some plusses to it as well as minuses.
Milagro
I'm only commenting because the comments here are appalling. This is a fine article highlighting the career of a fine woman. The article also shows the rise of anti-feminism in the last two decades, and so do the comments! Too often these days, discussions about women's rights and gender equality are reduced to cartoonish extremes, while real women see their real rights under the law chipped away at. Ms. Goldberg fears that it will be impossible to replace Justice Ginsburg with someone who equals her outstanding record on women's issues. This is something that should worry us all.
KateTheGreat
They can try chip away all they want...but not all liberal women will stand by if the "Gop-Christo-Taliban" takes over. We write to congress, protest, tell the truth, act responsibly, educate, listen, work hard, and if all of that fails, well - I'm not getting relegated to the kitchen barefoot and pregnant without a real fight. I hope Obama realizes that we MUST HAVE liberal justices as replacements on the court...any more weak/moderate/*gasp* conservative appointments and we could be cast into the dark ages which would speed us towards some national conflagration.
kansasrefugee
I agree, KateTheGreat, and I'm willing to fight as well (I do it every day asserting myself in various fora, working hard (and not sleeping with people I work with, especially the boss or a subordinate!), & mentoring young men and women who did not get good quality fathering.
MrsMurgatroyd
I truly hope that Ginsburg makes it through her illness. But there is always room for Hilary if one of the other judges chooses to retire. Who else would the conservatives want "Ann Coulter'.? ?Please. We have to support women but they have to be stronger and less p---s driven then men.
kansasrefugee
I agree with you except where you generalize that all men are p--s driven. Some are not; unfortunately some of the ones on the Court are, maybe President Obama is not?
kansasrefugee
Justice Ginsburg is a woman of extraodinary courage, intellect and foresight. She has been an excellent Supreme Court Justice and those who would call her "actitivist" fail to understand that Scalia and Thomas are "activist" in regressing our country to white male dominance and emotional immaturity in men (did you hear their nonsense about the strip search case?),
I agree that there may never be another Justice like Justice Ginsburg, and I hope women can participate in the political economy and in their relationships with men from a stronger , less defensive position going forward. These regressive pressures are still present in our political economy, culture and even on the Court, however, and so we all have to work to fix them.
DevilsLawyer
Hear hear!
deucedaddydon
Aside from most of the comments------Even tho all the Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life,------They should be in that position only for four (4) years, thereby using all of their previous judicial bench experience & up to date knowledge for voting on up to date problems. (in my opinion)
JonathanSeer
Amazing how a writer in seeking to make a point says the stupidist things. Why does Goldberg think she has to diminish O'Conner and Sotomayor to praise Ginsburg, especially when to do so she has to ignore their equally unique experiences as women (which is Goldberg's point). Ginsburg's experience as a woman is no worse than O'Conners who broke in the legal profession at the same time, or Sotomayor's whose experiences were compounded by coming from the working poor (being a minority is actually a minor point compared to that). Is Ginsburg a great justice, we'll never know, because learning that about a justice requires them to be in the majority so they can write the decisions that matter. Her experience fighting for women's rights is not exclusively her own battle, but Goldberg idiotically makes it sound like she was a one-woman campaign.
DevilsLawyer
Actually, mathematically it's easier to write an opinion if you're consistently in the dissent (or concurrence) than in the majority. Only one of the majority (at least five) will write the majority opinion, while the dissent or concurrence is at most four people and can be as few as one.
If we're talking more frequently read opinions then I take your point, since it's the majority opinion that has precedential value. I know I skip the dissent if the case isn't that important for my research and I just need the precedent. However, in any major case, especially Supreme Court cases, the dissenting opinion is always important.
At any rate, I would say Ginsburg's dissenting opinion on Gonzales v. Carhart (the 2007 case Goldberg mentions) is a fine, fine example of judicial reasoning and passion for equality. Stay healthy, Justice!
neverlate
Obama announces that Afghanistan is a war of necessity. He announces he has a strategy and a General to implement the strategy. The General comes back and tells Obama what he will need to implement the strategy. Obama gets cold feet, and announces things have changed and they have to rethink the strategy. Or, maybe, is it a war of necessity, or a nasty little side show? Obama receives the NPP for indecisiveness and unnecessarily putting American soldiers in harms way?
The Norwegians and main stream media are totally on board with this. The only ones to understand the extent of this duplicity and incompetence are Fox News and SNL.
neverlate
Ginsburg, and evidently the author of this article, are fighting a battle already won (if it was ever really a war to begin with). I work with a lot of smart young women, and they laugh at this type of analysis. I guess you are still under the influence of your Freshman Women's Studies professor.
DevilsLawyer
I'm actually kind of happy that you, and the bright young women you work with, are oblivious enough that you have no idea of the struggles women face for equal pay, reproductive health, and a host of other issues. It means there's been real progress. It does seem a little callous for these young women to laugh about real-life issues faced by those less fortunate, but I'll chalk it up to naivete and not malice or smugness.
AngelaM
Ginsberg does what those of us who have spent a lifetime trying to support equality for women, she protests without results. We fought for the right to contol our bodies and our lives and we see how it is being dismantled bit by bit, in the name of 'protecting us'. Nobody should vote vor Palin, she's incompetent. Every woman should have voted for Hillary, she was supremely qualified. But we wanted a 'guy' and we got one. One who will spend no political captial on women's issues. One who trots his corporate lawyer wife out for 'photo ops' with a shovel in the vegetable garden. We will all lose, but I have come to believe that we first need to lose all that was gained so that the next generation understands how hard it was to achieve those rights that they now take for granted. The guys won't save us, but it's a hard lesson to learn.
DevilsLawyer
Roe v. Wade was decided before there was a woman Justice in the Court, and Brown v. Board of Education was decided before there was a black Justice. Unhappiness with Obama's policies is one thing, but I don't think identity politics is the answer. Most Obama voters were no more sexist than most Hillary voters were racist. Let that old dead horse rest. If history is any guide, plenty of progress for women's, black, and gay rights can be made during the administration of male, white, or straight presidents.
kansasrefugee
I disagree with you here, DevilsLawyer. I don't like identity politics either, but unfortunately they are necessary when there is a legacy of severe discrimination and oppression as in the case of people of color and women in general. Many hetero Christian white men continue to this day to be resistant to understanding these issues. Of course, I think they are starting to look more and more ridiculous to people in the type of arrested development they display many times (see, e.g. Lindsey Graham at the Sotomayor hearings), but unfortunately they do remain the dominant group in power.
DevilsLawyer
It's not identity but viewpoints and convictions that matter. Identity can affect convictions, but does not determine what a person believes. Joe Biden is a guy who supported the Violence Against Women Act. The late Ted Kennedy was an affluent man, but fought for the rights of the working poor his whole career. And so on.
I agree that often, those who have experienced discrimination have the life experience to effectively fight for change. It's why I cheered Sonia Sotomayor's selection and confirmation. But when it comes to choosing leaders, there are a multitude of more important considerations than identity.
kansasrefugee
I think it is naive not to recognize that women are still below 20% at the top levels of money/power/status in our country. So, our "identities" as women remain tremendously significant in that we do not yet have a full seat at the table. The propensity for human beings to stereotype is just too great. And I am suspicious of anyone who does not acknowledge this propensity.
I do think that some women are "patriarchialist," for example, in that they tend to reinforce male dominance by (a) being tough and more dominant in style themselves (b) being submissive, yielding, and passive in relation to men. But I think these are symptoms of the problem that will dissipate if there is more effort to get women on the court. But of course it is important to find women who are as individuated, personally mature and "healed" of these symptoms as possible.
Sotomayor's "wise Latina judges better" was an appalling example, I thought, of this symptom of women taking on traits of dominance that have been valued in men under patriarchy. I don't blame her for doing it, because she's dealing with some people who think "white men judge better."
sallyma
American women, especially, need to come to a place where they can accept a women in the supreme seat of power. Michelle's resistance to Hillary was a wonderful example of what many women suffer from: a lack of respect for other women. Why? Because we have no foundation to build that respect upon. We are inculcated into male power as the "right" way to do things. Michelle couldn't get past that. But, remember, that is exactly WHY she is given voice by male media. For every lackey Michelle their are millions of women w/out a voice, who would if given the chance sing to the heavens our support for strong women candidates.
kansasrefugee
I agree sallyma that women often lack respect for other women and are inculcated into male power. I suspect the lack of respect for other women may stem from the fact we often have mothers who did not respect us and stand up for us in the face of male power (i.e. the father).
I have to say, though, that I don't think Hillary Clinton is the answer. I don't think she's personally honest. That's the reason I voted for Barack Obama. I would love to see self-made (i.e. not wives of Presidents, like Hillary) women rising. HHS Sec'y Kathleen Sebelius, has the kind of courage that comes from this autonomy (and the kind of autonomy that comes from this courage), as does Justice Ginsburg. Justice Ginsburg came of age in a much, much more challenging era though. She is really a heroine, I think.
neverlate
bla bla bla bla - you all (feminist) are a bunch of blithering idiots. Maybe if you thought of yourself as a human being, rather than a particular sex, you would have a little less angst.
kansasrefugee
What make you say we don't think of ourselves as human beings? After all, we don't dehumanize other people like you are by calling other people "blithering idiots."
It is a fact that woman are below 20% representation at the top levels of power/money/status in the US. Gender is relevant or else this would not be the case. And the power struggle between the genders will not dissipate until it is fixed.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.