Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Media Misogyny Turns a Discussion on Mental Illness into a ‘Mommy war’
You’ve probably read Liza Long’s “I Am Adam Lanza’s Mother” and you may have read writer Sarah Kendzior’s criticism of Long for using her real name and her son’ s picture, thereby violating her son’s privacy. This has apparently been dubbed a “Mommy War.” Gag me.
These two women are having none of that. Taking aim at our culture of misogyny that branded their disagreement a “Mommy War”, Long and Kendzior released a joint statement:
We would like to release a public statement on the need for a respectful national conversation on mental health. Whatever our prior disagreements, we both believe that the stigma attached to mental illness needs to end. We need to provide affordable, quality mental health care for families. We need to provide support for families who have a relative who is struggling.
We both agree that privacy for family members, especially children, is important. Neither of us anticipated the viral response to our posts. We love our children and hope you will respect their privacy.
“Our nation has suffered enough in the aftermath of Newtown. We are not interested in being part of a ‘mommy war’. We are interested in opening a serious conversation on what can be done for families in need. Let’s work together and make our country better.”
Ms. Kendzior’s tweets explain the mommy war narrative. @sarahkendzior, “Unfortunately I am still “mom blogger” in all of the other websites and newspapers that reprinted @LizSzabo’s article. Too little too late.” The media assumed that because she’s a woman, she’s a “mom blogger.” In fact, she is a mom, but she also holds a PhD and is a “Columnist for @AJEnglish, contributor to Atlantic, Registan, Foreign Policy.” And we wonder what the problem is with this culture.
She points out in another tweet, “@les_politiques @joshuafoust @USATODAY @WrongingRights I don’t write about my kids. Fathers who write on politics are not “daddy bloggers”.” And lastly, “@matttbastard @joshuafoust This is what happens when you refuse to play along in media “mommy war”.”
There’s a long history of female writers being dismissed due to their gender, but this is really out there. Mommy bloggers? Really? I bet there are a lot of women who write about parenting who would prefer not to be called mommy by the media, but perhaps the media is acknowledging their own cultural infantilism. There is an “about” section on Ms. Kendzior’s blog that might be helpful in the future. Whatever. There are many women who don’t mind the term “mommy blogger”, and that’s fine. But apparently I have to state the obvious: Just because a writer is a female does not mean that she writes about parenting.
Long’s story resonated with families across America who deal silently with mental health issues, violent family members, and more. She’s right that this is a national crisis. She never anticipated that her post would go viral, so while it’s important to clarify that she may have inadvertently stigmatized her son, as most mentally ill people do not become mass murderers (if indeed he is mentally ill—this is unclear to me from her earlier blog posts), it’s also important to remember that she probably had no way of knowing that her post would go viral. This shouldn’t diminish the importance of her personal story, or its impact on our national dialogue about mental health issues.
That said, I’d like to point out the irony that Long says in an earlier blog post that she was a Reagan supporter as a teenager. It was Reagan who dumped the violently mentally ill on the streets of America. No doubt she’s well aware of this now. I don’t bring that up to be partisan, but rather to point out that policies that sound like they make “common sense” at the time, but never bother to examine why the policies they take aim at were enacted to begin with, are often doomed to fail. We see this repeatedly with the simplistic arguments made by modern day conservatives who are loathe to examine the complexities behind policies with which they disagree.
Speaking of policies with which they disagree, President Obama’s Affordable Care Act does, actually, take steps to address mental health issues and make it affordable for struggling families. Those benefits will begin in 2014.
Starting in 2014, substance abuse or mental illness can no longer be used by insurers to deny coverage as a “pre-existing condition” – and insurers also won’t be able to use those conditions to raise your premiums.
Also in 2014, mental health and substance use disorder services will be part of the essential benefits package, a set of health care service categories that must be covered by certain plans, including all insurance policies that will be offered through the Exchanges, and Medicaid.
This is only the beginning of the kind of change we need, but the fact that Democrats fought to address mental health at all demonstrates that at least one party is attempting to deal with real issues. The other party is currently suggesting that arming our teachers and forcing students to pray to their chosen God will stop school shootings, neither of which are viable or even sane solutions to the problem.
Kendzior’s criticism and Long’s response to it go a long way in showing how we can actually discuss tough issues. They hashed it out and found common ground. We aren’t going to agree on everything, and we don’t need to agree. What we need to do is keep in mind the goal of reducing gun violence in America. We need to keep talking past our disagreements, realizing that none of us has all of the answers and that by listening to different (qualifier: sane) points of view, we will have better success in addressing the issues.
We need to have a national conversation about gun control and mental health issues, as well as economic policies that promote inequality, as economic disparity has a known correlation to violent societies.
Lastly, while it’s easy to label this a mental health problem, we have to admit that only one woman has committed mass murder in America in the last 30 years. The rest are men. The majoirty are white men. If it was truly just mental illness, then wouldn’t we have more female mass shooters? Is it possible that our culturally warped notion of American masculinity (see the Bushmaster ad that refers to the assault weapon as “your man card”) informs these statistics?
Our culture might do better to listen to American women instead of trying to diminish them with “mommy wars” labels. Kendzior and Long are showing the way to real dialogue, which is also the precursor to peace and the opposite of violence. Is anyone listening?
Note: I’m not linking to Long’s post out of respect for her son’s privacy. You can google her article, which raises many of good points about our mental health crisis.
Follow me on Twitter here.
House Republican Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn claimed that guns aren't part of the root problem of sch ...
Discussion about mental illness and its treatment remains a challenge in our society. If we are go ...
After the US Army announced today that the soldier suicide rate had reached an all time high in 2007, Democr ...
Democratic Senator Mark Warner has an A rating from the NRA, but that isn't stopping him from calling fo ...
When times get tough, and state governments are taking in less revenue, they have to either raise taxes ...
Reynardine
Dec. 18th, 2012 at 4:10 pm
I have, indeed, seen her article.
There was an old army recruit jingle, which went:
This is my rifle
That is my gun
This one’s for fighting
That one’s for fun
But the macho-stupid popular culture does not make the distinction.
Kevin Shinn
Dec. 19th, 2012 at 6:46 am
Actually, you’ve confused which one’s for the fighting and which one’s for the fun…
Tom
Dec. 18th, 2012 at 8:49 pm
Listen to the women. They aren’t starting wars and they’re not going on shooting sprees.
Pierrette Mimi Poinsett MD
Dec. 18th, 2012 at 8:50 pm
A most excellent analysis of how the medium can warp the message. I am pleased that both writers posted a joint statement. I too am a mom of a teen with mental health issues. His issues were severe and life threatening to me, him and others from ages 9-12. 2.5 years of intensive residential treatment made a remarkable difference. He is now nearly 16 yos and has been home with us since May 2012. The work continues with extensive school, county mental health and social support. However I hope great hope that he will continue to gain mastery over his again and be productive. Coming from a family with many members with mental health issues, I have seen a spectrum of how various treatment approaches have and have not worked. I am convinced that early mental health intervention IS making the difference for my son. Progress not perfection. Key is Acceptance and valuing him for all of who he is. My son is far more than his diagnostic labels. He is a bright, inquisitive, creative, athletic teen with great potential now and in the future.
majii
Dec. 18th, 2012 at 9:19 pm
Thanks for sharing, Pierrette, and I wish much continued success for your son and your family.
Sugapea
Dec. 19th, 2012 at 12:34 am
Thank you Sarah, for bringing this to our attention.
The Native American people always respected and included ‘elder women’ sitting at their decision-making-head-table. Perhaps, one of our mistakes is not giving greater value to our ‘wise feminine wisdom’ more often in American problem solving.
Maybe the key to solving this out-of-control-masculine-gun-problem could be a group of Wise Women working together from both sides of the political aisle. Something or nation has never tried.
Juliet
Dec. 19th, 2012 at 1:20 am
I find it startling how hypocritical those are whom ‘defend’ people who are being bashed, regardless of their gender or race or anything else.
Such as the commenter above: Why does it have to be: “Wise feminine wisdom”?
So when men have wisdom, you wouldnt be offended in them saying “People should listen to our wise masculine wisdom”? If some man said that to you, you’d call him out to be sexist; Whereas when you said it just now about your own gender I presume, you do not view your self as sexist. I get your point, I agree to it, but our nation, certainly (extremely) when it comes to women, is excessively small-penis and will take at least 200 years to ever consider a board of women to whom consultation over matters is checked-about by. This is perpetuated by our culture of meritocracy, where we view ‘moms’ as second class intellectuals, if intellectual at all, and PhD’s as the gold standard for those who have opinions. Those whom are extremely intelligent (IQ testing is a myth) that do not have merit are never listened or even heard by the media for their opinion, unless they are in this ridiculously absurd system of merit from their ‘education’ through the American system of ‘education’. I have witnessed foreigners who are known in their field in their country which is rated in higher-knowledge internationally than America in their field, to come to America, be ridiculously slighted by nearly everyone, and angered, they leave with their advanced skill sets to go back to their country. I had a friend from China who had a PhD in Physics and worked on microchips and the like in his homeland, what did he do in the US? He was a community college mathematics tutor.
Double standards, anybody? If you don’t want misogyny, as everybody with a cranium does not (though Ive met a few extremely intelligent people that have trifling deficits in comprehension as “everybody having equal rights”) don’t be sitting there casually encouraging double…
stumptownhero
Dec. 19th, 2012 at 2:49 am
Maybe we should call all of the Right Wing punditry “Penis bloggers” since that is the only head they seem to apply to the conversation!
robyn ryan
Dec. 19th, 2012 at 1:40 pm
American media always assume that a women isn’t a real person until she’s been bred successfully.
Women are never portrayed as anything except mothers(or sluts). Even rare pictures of female soldiers have to have the obligatory toddler attached.
Sidebar ads always claim a ‘single mom’ has discovered a cure/remedy/weird old trick that has doctors(all male and childless?)furious. WTF?
The unconstitutional denial of women’s right to own their own bodies is a means of forcing them into breeding and ‘mom’hood – where their rights are further denied in favor of the child.
A local hospital has a whole floor designated ‘Woman and Child’. Haven’t figured out whether that means they are legally equal, or that you can’t use the gyn services unless you’ve bred a child.
We need to decouple the term ‘mom’ from ‘female.’
We’re born female, not pregnant. Biology is not destiny. We were shouting that in the street in the 1960s.
Reynardine
Dec. 19th, 2012 at 1:57 pm
Well, I agree with you somewhat, but the floor you alluded to may be one of those where mothers in for noncontagious conditions can have their small children in with them, or – conversely- small children can have their mothers in.
CS
Dec. 21st, 2012 at 1:08 pm
A floor where young children can have their mothers with them? Why not their PARENTS with them? See, there’s that gender bias again. Everyone expects soldiers dying in battle to cry “mommy” rather than “daddy” and everyone assumes that mothers are the primary caregiver, the compassionate ones, the ones that do all the nurture. Maybe they often are, whether by choice, biology, or cultural bias. But if we suppose that mothers are automatically more nurturing, then we accept that biology really DOES have something to do with it, and that reverts the conversation right back to women’s roles being determine by biology. I fully and openly admit that my husband is the calmer parent and frequently the more nurturing parent. That’s not because I’m NOT nurturing, but simple that he is moreso. We both work, so who would be with our child on such a floor in a hospital? We’d be taking turns, not designating one. These terms are an old holdover from a time when women did not work and men did, so women did all the caring for children. We need an update. Fathers are parents, too, and in many (hopefull most?) cases, damn good ones.
CM
Dec. 21st, 2012 at 12:38 am
“It was Reagan who dumped the violently mentally ill on the streets of America.”
This is not exactly correct. It was Tip O’Neill who started the dumping. At the time he had sufficient clout to override Reagan’s veto.
Also, more importantly, it was more nuanced – the fundamental argument (on both sides, as I recall), was the concept of self-determination and that it was cruel as things currently stood.
Additionally, the Soviet Union had a policy of declaring political dissidents as insane and imprisoning them.
That policy, regardless of its history, certainly deserves reexamination.
CM
Dec. 21st, 2012 at 12:49 am
Additional background here:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lan...
www.nytimes.com/1984/10/3...
Conservative Jane
Dec. 31st, 2012 at 12:39 pm
“I don’t bring that up to be partisan, but rather to point out that policies that sound like they make “common sense” at the time, but never bother to examine why the policies they take aim at were enacted to begin with, are often doomed to fail. We see this repeatedly with the simplistic arguments made by modern day conservatives who are loathe to examine the complexities behind policies with which they disagree.”
I have a strong dislike for statements that purport to show the speaker as a fair-minded person from their side of the political spectrum, while simultaneously showing, in this so-called fair-mindedness, that the other side is callous and insane. If you’re going to make political statements, go ahead. I don’t have a problem with people having their own political opinions, as long as they’re not insulting the opposition, and as long as they are trying to be reasonable. Your article is reasonable for the most part, although not 100% accurate in the Reagan statement, as CM pointed out.
I am a conservative who supports the assault-weapon gun control discussion: the right to bear arms is too ingrained in American culture since its inception to overturn, but assault weapons are just scary. I’m pretty sure they’re not what the founding fathers would have wanted. I also think it’s even more important that we have a national discussion about mental health care, and I’m so glad that as a nation, we do seem to be continuing the discussion in the wake of this horrific tragedy. And please, don’t assume that one party only supports the extreme position of the NRA. They don’t speak for us. Many of us are reasonable. Also, sure we can pray for an end to gun violence in the US, but prayer isn’t a substitute for action. It should be concurrent with concrete and sensible solutions.