Two Steps Forward, Two Steps Back

Twenty-five years ago, I was researching a book about the changing roles of women in society, and trying to find out if society's attitudes had also changed. In some cases, it seemed they had: there were more women doctors, for example, and going to medical school no longer seemed as unusual in 2000 as it had when I was growing up in the 1950s. (I still remember being told that women were best suited to working as teachers, nurses, or secretaries. Those are certainly fine occupations, but my point is I don't recall anyone back then telling us girls that we could be college presidents, or doctors, or business executives.)  

As for women politicians, in the 1950s, there still weren't a lot of them at the national level, even though women had gained the right to vote in 1920. In the US Congress in 1955, for example, there was only 1 woman senator, and just 16 women representatives (out of 435). And from the 1920s through the 1970s, many of the women who got to congress were widows, selected to complete the term of their late husband. However, things have certainly changed. If we use the congress as a measure of progress, we see that there are currently 25 women in the Senate, and 125 in the House. And the majority of these women are not widows. In fact, the idea that a woman might choose to run for office is no longer as shocking as it once was: there are currently 12 women governors, and more than 400 cities and towns have women mayors.

And yet... even in 2024, women candidates often face obstacles that men do not. I can give you a long list of women who ran for office (from both parties) over the past three decades who were subjected to rude, and even vulgar, commentary about their looks, how they dress, and even their family (or lack thereof). And the rise of social media has only made it easier to disseminate those kinds of comments.  

Of course, none of this is new: there are certain stereotypes that have historically been associated with women, and we can hear some folks dredging them up every election cycle. Women candidates are often called "dumb" or "stupid," for example. If they are married, there are questions raised about whether their husband is okay with them running for office, and what about the kids-- who is taking care of them? (And as we have seen in the current election cycle, if the candidate doesn't have kids, or is a stepmother, there are questions raised about that too.)

But what bothers me the most is the persistence of the myth that women in politics must have slept with someone in power to get ahead. There are aspersions cast on the woman's morals, with the implication that she must be somewhat promiscuous. (Of course, male candidates are rarely held to the same standard: they may be divorced multiple times, or cheat on their wife, or have a reputation for being a playboy, but that doesn't seem to disqualify them. Nor do most voters call out the hypocrisy of the guys who make these accusations against their female opponents. Evidently, if it's someone on "our team," he is free to say whatever he wants.) 

And that is why it really irritated me when I saw the online trolling of Kamala Harris by Donald Trump, with one of the most vulgar verbal attacks I've encountered in a long time. I waited for members of the Republican party to tell him he had gone too far, but of course, they said nothing. I waited for the media to make a story out of Mr Trump implying that the sitting vice president is basically a common prostitute, but other than a couple of mentions, most reporters seemed to treat it as another example of "Trump being Trump."

Let me be very clear that this is NOT partisan: I didn't like it when some folks made sleazy remarks about Sarah Palin, or Hillary Clinton. And as for First Ladies, I didn't like it when Melania Trump was spoken of in a demeaning way, nor did I like it when Michelle Obama was spoken of in ways that were both racist and sexist. I just don't understand why in 2024, we are still seeing those same tired myths that assume a woman in public life couldn't possibly have any political skills or intelligence, and she must have slept her way to the top.  

I understand that there is plenty to criticize about any candidate, male or female. I understand that not everyone likes (pick one) Kamala or Hillary or Melania or Michelle. I'm fine with policy disagreements. I'm fine with disagreements about what a female candidate, or a male candidate's wife, said at an event. But I am not fine with casting aspersions on the woman's morals, or sending around vulgar and degrading memes. It's time for this to stop. It's time for male politicians to stop doing it, and for folks on social media to stop re-posting these kinds of attacks. Female politicians and First Ladies deserve basic respect. So, yes, women in public life have come a long way; but some of the attitudes and stereotypes about them still have not. It makes me wonder what it will take for this to change. And I honestly don't know...

I Heard It On the Radio

It's National Radio Day, a day to celebrate a mass medium that is still important to many of us. I understand that in our internet and TV-oriented world, it's easy to forget about radio, but not all of us do. In fact, I know many people who still listen to it often. I'm one of them. 

I can honestly say that radio changed my life. Growing up, I loved rock and roll (much to the dismay of my parents, who thought rock music was "noise"). And I bonded with the deejays I heard on my favorite top-40 stations. They played my favorite songs, and the deejays sounded so friendly-- even though I never met most of them, I felt as if I knew them; and when I was having a bad day, listening to my favorite station made me feel better somehow. And I decided I wanted to be a deejay when I got older, so that I could play the hits and cheer people up too.

Of course, as many of you who have read my blog are aware, radio in the 1950s and 1960s did not welcome female deejays. It took me until my senior year of college before Northeastern University's WNEU finally let me on the air, in late October 1968; and as I like to say, somehow the republic did not fall. In fact, I got fan mail (I've saved some of it). I also became the station's music director, and I began making friends with record promoters, including some who introduced me to imports from England and from Canada. (This now internet-famous 1968 photo was taken in the WNEU studios, when I first went on the air.)                                               

No radio stations would hire me when I graduated: as I said, women announcers were still not being greeted with open arms. So, I used my degree in education and taught in the Boston Public Schools while continuing to try to find a radio station that would give me a chance. Along the way, I did some free-lance writing for several magazines and for the ABC Radio Network, before I was finally hired by WCAS in Cambridge, Massachusetts; it was a small station, only 250 watts, and a day-timer, but it had a devoted following. We played some folk, some rock, a few pop hits-- and it was like a dream come true to finally be on the air on a regular basis. From there, it was on to WMMS in Cleveland, where my friendships with Canadian record promoters enabled me to be the first to play a certain rock band some of you know-- Rush-- in the spring of 1974. (And we are still in touch to this day.)

My radio journey took me to New York, to Washington DC, and back to my hometown of Boston. I later started a radio and management consulting business, and I traveled all over North America, training air personalities and creating stations that met the needs of the audience. During the four decades I spent in radio, I worked in many interesting places, and I met lots of up-and-coming performers-- and some big stars too. And I hope that anyone who heard me on the air thought of me as someone worth listening to. And then, the industry changed and many of us found ourselves out of work. But even though I was able to reinvent myself by getting a PhD and becoming a professor, I never stopped loving radio, and I miss being on the air even now.

Of course, as we all know, today's radio is very different from when I was a deejay. In many cities, there are no live and local stations at all. There are fewer friendly deejays, and a lot more angry talk show hosts. I couldn't wait to hear my favorite station when I was growing up, but young people seldom listen to radio any more. Giant corporations, which bought up so many local stations, ended up either automating or voice-tracking them, or in some cases, shutting them down. Listeners got tired of all the commercials, and all the sameness, and they went elsewhere. And thanks to YouTube and services like Spotify, people could create their own playlists and not have to wait for their favorite station to play a song they liked. 

And yet, even now, in cities across the US, there are still some live and local stations, still some entertaining deejays, still some places to hear your favorite songs (along with traffic and weather and news). Even now, there are people listening to radio in their car, whether it's on satellite, or on NPR, or on a college station-- and yes they still exist. And even now, there are listeners who think of radio as a companion, just like I did, just like I still do. So, happy National Radio Day. It's a different industry, in a different world, but while radio is no longer considered a "magical medium," it is still capable of being there when we need it. And I hope it will continue to be, now and in the future.