Lucas: Women have nothing to lose but their gains
In the evolving landscape of women’s rights, the need for a fresh slogan has emerged, prompting discussions about the direction and inclusivity of the movement. Traditional phrases like “Women’s rights are human rights” may no longer resonate as powerfully in today’s context, suggesting a call for a more assertive rallying cry. Drawing inspiration from the iconic phrase in the Communist Manifesto, a proposed new slogan—“Women of the world, unite. You have nothing to lose but your gains”—highlights the urgency for women to unify in the face of shifting societal dynamics. This slogan not only acknowledges the historical struggles but also emphasizes the potential risks of complacency in safeguarding hard-won rights.
The recent appointment of Giselle Byrd, a transgender woman, to the Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women has sparked significant debate within the women’s rights community. Critics argue that Byrd’s appointment undermines the original mission of the commission, which was established to advocate specifically for women and girls. Republican state Rep. Alyson Sullivan-Almeida raised concerns regarding the lack of representation for biological women in such a pivotal role, questioning why a qualified biological woman was not appointed instead. This controversy coincides with proposed legislation to create a separate commission for transgender individuals, further complicating the dialogue around representation and equality. Byrd’s historic appointment as the first African American transgender member of the commission marks a significant milestone, yet it also raises questions about the future of women’s rights advocacy in Massachusetts, a state already recognized for its matriarchal political landscape.
As Massachusetts continues to be led predominantly by women in high offices, the conversation around gender representation is more relevant than ever. With five out of six top statewide positions held by women, the state’s political climate reflects a shift toward female leadership. However, the implications of appointing transgender individuals to women-centric roles challenge the traditional definitions of womanhood and representation. This ongoing debate underscores a critical juncture for the women’s movement, as it navigates the complexities of inclusivity while striving to maintain its foundational goals. As the movement evolves, the call for a new slogan encapsulates the need for unity and vigilance among women, ensuring that their rights are not only preserved but also expanded in an increasingly complex society.
The Women’s Movement needs a new slogan.
“Women’s rights are human rights” is all right as far as it goes. But in these changing times, does it go far enough?
With all deference to Karl Marx and his rabble-rousing buddy Friedrich Engels, a new slogan should go something like this: “Women of the world, unite. You have nothing to lose but your gains.”
The quote is a knock-off from their Communist Manifesto, which called for a worldwide communist revolution to free workers from the oppressive boot of capitalism.
The rallying cry came from a pair of guys who never had a real job between them. Marx was a sometime journalist, which, as everybody knows, is not a real job, and Engels was the son of a rich mill owner.
The actual quote, which in 1848 shook the capitalist world, was, “Workers of the world, unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains.”
But why quibble?
The issue is the local reaction — or lack thereof — among women’s rights activists over Gov. Maura Healey’s appointment of Giselle Byrd, a former man, to the state’s Commission on the Status of Women. Byrd is the executive director of a regional theater company.
The 19-member commission, created in 1998, is, according to its website, “dedicated to the advancing of women’s rights and opportunities, promoting equality and providing a voice for women and girls across the state.”
It does not say anything about people born as men, as Byrd was, transitioning into a woman.
The flap over the appointment, which was made in August, came to the forefront in view of pending legislation, filed by Sen. Patricia Jehlen of Somerville, that would create a separate commission on transgender people.
Some believe that such a commission would weaken the authority and the gains made by the existing women’s commission.
Others like Republican state Rep. Alyson Sullivan-Almeida of Plymouth told the Herald that Healey’s appointment of Byrd “makes no sense” in the first place.
She asked, “Out of nearly three and a half million biological girls and women in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Gov. Healey couldn’t identify a qualified biological woman to appoint to the Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women?”
Of course she could, but she appointed Byrd anyway, pointing out that former Gov. Charlie Baker appointed a transgender woman to the commission in 2016.
Byrd, the second appointee, is, however, the first African American transgender person to be named to the commission.
While popular in some quarters, the Byrd appointment has yet to be publicly endorsed by the Massachusetts Caucus of Women Legislators, a bipartisan group made up of female members of the House and Senate.
All the talk of the appointment of Byrd to the women’s commission may be academic anyway.
Face it. We live in a one-party, matriarchal state to begin with — the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, now known as Massachusetts the Matriarchal State.
Women run the state.
Things are so one-sided that some solon will soon be filing legislation calling for the creation of a Commission on the Status of Men.
Consider that five of the six top statewide offices are held by women. They are Gov. Healey, the state’s first openly gay governor; Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll, Attorney General Andrea Campbell, state Treasurer Deborah Goldberg, and state Auditor Diana DiZoglio.
There is also Senate President Karen Spilka and Boston Mayor Michelle Wu.
The only guy hanging around is Secretary of State Billy Galvin, 74, and it is only a matter of time before a woman, transgender or not, takes him out.
Not that there is anything wrong with it.
Yeah, right.
Veteran political reporter Peter Lucas can be reached at: peter.lucas@bostonherald.com
