Independent Women's Forum - Research Areas > Gender Discrimination

Danica Patrick Wins Indy Japan 300

info@iwf.org (Allison Kasic) — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:05:00 EDT

Danica Patrick won the Indy Japan 300this weekend, becoming the first female winner in IndyCar history. I'm not an IndyCar fan, but I have been a Danica Patrick fan ever since this incident in 2005 (as reported by IWF's Carrie Lukas on NRO):

Last month, Patrick finished fourth in the Indianapolis 500, the best finish by a woman in the history of the nearly century-old race. Her response to sexist remarks made by Formula One boss, Bernie Ecclestone, during a "congratulatory" phone call, deserves equally enthusiast applause.

When talking to Patrick, Ecclestone remarked that "women should be all dressed in white like all other domestic appliances." He also repeated this bizarre sentiment in an interview. This wasn't the first time Ecclestone has made offensive remarks. According to an Associated Press story written about the phone call, in 2000 Ecclestone told Autosport Racing magazine that for a woman to compete in Formula One, "she would have to be a woman who was blowing away the boys. ... What I would really like to see happen is to find the right girl, perhaps a black girl with super looks, preferably Jewish or Muslim, who speaks Spanish."

Patrick's reaction to the weird, sexist comments? She shrugged them off: "I was a bit confused. ...So I don't really know what to think about it. I don't know if he was talking about someone else or the majority or what, I'm not really sure. Or, maybe that's his real feeling. If that's the case, then you know, [it] doesn't really matter because I'm racing in the Indy Racing League."

It's a refreshing change from the overreaction we have come to expect when someone is confronted with offensive behavior. Patrick could have called for Ecclestone's resignation or fueled a media frenzy to investigate the "boys club" of auto racing. She could have demanded that Formula One create a nonprofit seeking to achieve greater gender balance in auto racing.

But she didn't. She's in the Indy Racing League, after all. Some jerk's remarks are small potatoes.

Mailbag: We Conservative Women Have No Brains!

info@iwf.org (Charlotte Allen) — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 07:55:00 EDT

Here's a humdinger from B.F.--a man, no less:

"Carrie Lukas' gushing review of 'The Female Brain' by Louann Brizendine remains proudly on the home page of your website."

[And it's still there! Click here to read it.]

"Her delight in the book is not surprising. as the women at IWF always take such joy in anything that might support inequitable social policies--after all, as Ms. Lukas points out, the book proves women are less rational than men and more emotional.

"This leads to such outrageous demands such as men taking responsibility for child care. Of course, once women realize such demands are simply a matter of hormones (irrational hormones, presumably) they will be happier with their lot in life.

"Yet surprisingly, for such an intellectually rigorous site as IWF, the review remains posted even though since its publications there have been serious questions about the accuracy of its claim. When requested to provide data or the studies to support her conclusions Dr. Brizendine has been unable to produce anything. Sounds like junk science to me.

"Of course, for the ladies-who-lunch crowd at IWF, junk science is only something to raise when advocating for tort reform or to bash feminists. I suppose one should not judge Ms. Lukas or the other ladies at IWF too harshly; after all with all those hormones buzzing around, we can't expect them to show manly traits such as accuracy in what they write."

OK, I bug-sprayed the buzzing hormones for a second or two, so I'll try to think rationally. Where exactly does Carrie's review lack "accuracy"? From what I've read about Brizendine's best-selling book, Carrie did a fair summary. And since the book has garnered many an enthusiastic review (including this one from Robin Marantz Henig of the New York Times, a periodical that can scarcely be called conservative), Carrie's summary is scarcely out of the mainstream.

As for your assertion, B.F., that Brizendine "has been unable to produce" data supporting her conclusions, I typed this into Google: "louann brizendine female brain data question." I eventually came up with this post by one Mark Liberman, who I think is a linguistics professor at the University of Pennsylvania. It seems from his post that Brizendine produced plenty of data--although Liberman happens to disagree that it supports her conclusions. Who's right--Brizendine or Liberman? Since Liberman seems to be on a crusade against Brizendine (click here for his attack on New York Times columnist David Brooks, who also likes Brizendine's book), I myself feel compelled to take his views with a grain of salt (from the saltshaker at my daily lunch with the ladies). You, dear Inky readers, now have the links and can decide for yourselves.

Now--off to lunch and to dream up some truly "inequitable social policies"!

Brown Sugar - It's Not So Sweet

info@iwf.org (Michelle D. Bernard) — Fri, 30 Apr 2004 00:00:00 EDT

Consider America's greatest political cartoonists. Hands down, my favorite is Aaron McGruder and the cutting political satire reflected in his cartoon strip, The Boondocks. That being said, I must admit that I do enjoy the barbed satire of Garry Trudeau's Doonesbury. Recently, Trudeau's political observations ran a red light in referring to the nation's National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, a black woman, as "brown sugar." Frankly, the political satire in the April 7, 2004 Doonesbury escapes me and most women I know, black or white, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican. It draws on centuries of deep-rooted, wicked and indefensible portrayals of black women. In doing so, it is decidedly unfunny. The only purpose served by this cartoon strip is that it proved one sad fact: despite the contentions of many, in 21st century America, race and gender still matter.

At first glance, Trudeau's comic strip seems merely to depict President George W. Bush and Dr. Rice discussing Richard Clarke, the former counterterrorism adviser to Presidents Bush and Bill Clinton. In the strip, after waxing on about Clarke's portrayal of Dr. Rice in his book, Dr. Rice asks the President whether he had heard of al Qaeda. The President quips, careful 'brown sugar," evoking the painful stereotype of the black woman as a hot-blooded minx.

It is not lost on me that in musing about President Bush's reported penchant for giving nicknames to people around him, Trudeau also suggests that this is how President Bush views Dr. Rice. Needless to say, it seems that that the President�s respect for Dr. Rice is profound.

In Trudeau's cartoon, the president was not giving Dr. Rice a nickname. He was putting her in her place. The images of black women being put in their place are widespread and have been exploited in literature, art and song since the first slave ships traversed the Middle Passage. The Rolling Stones' "Brown Sugar," which is considered by some to be one of the greatest rock and roll songs of all time, demonstrates my point:

"Gold coast slave ship bound for cotton fields, sold in a market down in New Orleans. Scarred old slaver know he's doin' alright. Hear him whip the women just around midnight....Drums beating, cold english blood runs hot, Lady of the house wond'rin where it's gonna stop. House boy knows that he's doin' alright. You should a heard him just around midnight. Ah brown sugar how come you taste so good (a-ha) brown sugar, just like a black girl should A-huh....Oh just like, just like a black girl should."

The fact is that black women at the apex of power have struggled long and hard for respect. The struggle still continues. This is why in this context, references to black women as brown sugar are not funny. It reminds us of the historical exploitation of black women in America. It reminds us that there are those who believe that no matter how accomplished we may become, no matter how educated we are, and no matter how many books we read, black women should remain in "their place," figuratively or literally. This place is one that is out of public view.

For example, it has been reported that in 1990, when Dr. Rice served as an adviser to former President George H.W. Bush, she was shoved out of the way by a secret service agent while attempting to enter the White House. Lest you think this treatment is reserved for Republicans, think again. In 1993, then Mayor Sharon Pratt Kelly and Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, both black women and Democrats, were invited to join former President Clinton at a political event in the District of Columbia. Aides to Clinton stopped Kelly and Norton from appearing with him before the cameras, apparently not realizing that they were two of the District�s highest ranking public officials. Clinton was forced to personally intervene.

While we are discussing stereotypes, let us not forget the ever present prattle about the prodigious achievements of such prominent black women. In 1990, Dr. Rice described it as "Condi in Wonderland." She told one publication that she had a friend whose words for it were, "My goodness, the monkey can read. It's amazing."

Things should have been different as Dr. Rice prepared for her appearance before the 9/11 commission. Whether or not you like Dr. Rice or her politics, the facts are what they are. A product of the segregated South, Dr. Rice entered college at the University of Denver at age 15. She holds a doctorate in international relations. At Stanford, she was a Russia specialist and later, became the university's provost. She has been an advisor to the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff on strategic nuclear policy. She served as a special assistant to President George H.W. Bush for national security affairs and senior director for Soviet Affairs at the National Security Council. Dr. Rice is the first woman ever appointed as National Security Advisor. After Secretary of State Colin Powell, she is the second African American to hold the post.

As Condoleezza Rice prepared to testify before the 9/11 commission about the events that lead up to the greatest single tragedy in American history, she -- no, we all -- deserved better. Even in satire, it's just not funny.