Women in the Workplace: Sexual Harassment WS 370 Women, Law and Policy Key Questions and Terms ◼ What is sexual harassment? ◼ What criteria have the federal courts used to decide sexual harassment cases? ◼ Is same-sex harassment sex discrimination? ◼ Are companies and public schools legally and financially liable for sexual harassment? Sexual Harassment  Legal Scholar Catharine McKinnon ◼ ◼  Sexual Harassment of Working Women (1979) sexual harassment = sex discrimination Grassroots Movement of the 1970s ◼ ◼ Working Women United (Ithaca, NY) Alliance Against Sexual Coercion (Cambridge, MA) Sexual Harassment  In the early days, the courts usually dismissed sexual harassment cases for the following reasons: ◼ Refused to acknowledge that sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination because either sex could be harassed. ◼ Unwilling to recognize harassment had consequences for an employee’s work conditions. Saw it as personal conduct, not employment related. ◼ Unwilling to hold companies legally responsible for harassment committed by an employee’s supervisor or coworker. (liability) Sexual Harassment: Charges Files through the EEOC 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2018 6,862 6,822 6,758 6,696 7,609 7,514 Charges Filed 7,944 7,809 7,571 % of Charges Filed By Males 16.2% 16.1% 17.8% 17.6% 17.5% 17.1% 16.6% 16.5% 15.9% 16.8% Resolutions 8,959 9,195 8,924 7,758 7,758 7,037 7,289 7,511 7,986 7,875 Monetary Benefits (Millions)* $41.2 $45.1 $43.0 $44.6 $35.0 $46.0 $40.7 $46.3 $56.6 $68.2 7,256 *This does not include monetary benefits obtained through litigation (court cases). Source: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2019 Sexual Harassment Statistics • An estimated 40-70% of women and 1020% of men have experienced sexual harassment in the workplace. • Most of cases go unreported. Sources: Juliano and Schwab 2001 Sexual Harassment Statistics (n = 2,235 full-time and part-time female employees) Source: Huffington Post, 2015. Sexual Harassment Statistics Source: Huffington Post, 2015. Sexual Harassment Videos ◼ NOW on PBS | Teen Sexual Harassment at Work | PBS  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovIsy-NVHh4 ◼ Knowing your rights: Sexual harassment in the workplace (CBS News)  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_7VTt87mTk ◼ Why women may fear speaking out about workplace sexual harassment (ABC News - GMA )  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGUMpXtHkjU Sexual Harassment  Where can sexual harassment occur? ◼ ◼ Workplace Schools    Sexual harassment is tired in civil court system, not the criminal court system: ◼  Harassment by teachers and administrators Harassment by peers Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Types of sexual harassment: ◼ ◼ Quid pro quo (“this for that”) Hostile working environment Other Forms of Harassment ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ Age Race Disability Religion National Origin Key U.S. Supreme Court Cases ◼ Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson (1986)  ◼ Established “hostile working environment” Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. (1993)  Outlined four (4) circumstances that constitute a “hostile work environment” ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ Frequency of conduct Severity Physically threatening or humiliating or a mere offensive utterance Unreasonably interferes with an employees work performance Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc. (1998)  Ruled that same-sex harassment is sex discrimination What else does the U.S. Supreme Court have to say about sexual harassment? ◼ Public schools can be sued and forced to pay damages, if they fail to stop sexual harassment for which they have received notice. ◼ Employers are liable for sexual harassment even if the threats are not carried out and the victim does not report the misconduct. ◼ U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that employees are protected from retaliation (i.e. lose their job) if they report sexual harassment in their workplace. Sexual harassment includes, but is not limited to the following: ◼ The victim as well as the harasser may be a woman or a man. The victim does not have to be of the opposite sex. ◼ The harasser can be the victim's supervisor, an agent of the employer, a supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or a non-employee. ◼ The victim does not have to be the person harassed but could be anyone affected by the offensive conduct. ◼ Unlawful sexual harassment may occur without economic injury to or discharge of the victim. ◼ The harasser's conduct must be unwelcome. From the EEOC’s website: ”Facts about Sexual Harassment” (http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-sex.html) SDSU’s Sexual Harassment Policy Office of Employee Relations and Compliance “San Diego State University shall be committed to preventing sexual harassment and to promptly addressing violations of this policy. The University shall create and maintain a positive learning and working environment for its students and employees and shall not tolerate sexual harassment. Nothing herein shall contravene rights guaranteed in the Constitution of the State of California or the Constitution of the United States.” http://bfa.sdsu.edu/oerc/staff/sexharas.aspx . The Wage Gap 0 Wage Gap 0 Comparable Worth Type of Employment 0 0 Sex Segregation in Labor Market/”Pink Collar” Ghetto 0 Equal Pay Act of 1963 0 Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 Equal Pay Act of 1963 0 No employer…shall discriminate…between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions…. Median Income in the U.S. 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018 $52,250 $56, 516 $60,309 $61,372 $63,179 --Male $50,033 $51,212 $51,640 $52,146 $55,291 --Female $39,157 $47,211 $41,554 $41,977 $45,097 --Asian $67,065 American /PI $77,166 $83,183 $81,331 $87,194 --White $58,270 American $62,950 $63,199 $65,273 $70,642 --Latinx $40,963 $45,148 $48,700 $50,486 $51,450 --African $34,598 American $36,898 $40,340 $40,258 $41,361 Overall Gender Race Source: U.S. Census Bureau The Wage Gap Race/Ethnicity Female Earnings as % Female Earnings as % of Male Earnings of White Male (same race/ethnicity) Earnings All Races/Ethnicities 81.1 White American 81.5 81.5 African American 89.0 65.3 Latinx 85.7 61.6 Asian American 75.5 93.5 Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Institute for Women’s Policy Research, 2018; earnings for full-time workers Gender Wage Gap Internationally Widest Gaps Lowest Gaps 0 Korea (34.1%) 0 Belgium (3.7%) 0 Japan (24.5%) 0 Greece (4.5%) 0 Israel (21.8%) 0 Costa Rica (4.7%) 0 U.S. (18.9%) 0 Denmark (5.3%) 0 Canada (18.5%) 0 Italy (5.6%) Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development 2020: https://data.oecd.org/earnwage/gender-wage-gap.htm Women in the Workforce Women in the Workforce Is Comparable Worth Better? 0 Equal pay for work in occupations at comparable levels requiring equivalent skill levels, effort, and responsibility. 0 Example: Housekeepers and Janitors 0 Would eliminate the problem of pay inequities arising from gender-based occupational distributions, i.e. certain professions are seen as “women’s work.” Equal Pay: The Lilly Ledbetter Case 0 Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (2007) 0 Ensuring Equal Pay for Equal Work 0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7YB4o duP08 Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 0 A bill to amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and to modify the operation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, to clarify that a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice that is unlawful under such Acts occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, and for other purposes. reproductive justice Understanding Reproductive Justice: Transforming the Pro-Choice Movement By Loretta Ross eproductive Justice is the complete physical, mental, spiritual, political, social and economic well-being of women and girls, based on the full achievement and protection of women's human rights. It offers a new perspective on reproductive issue advocacy, pointing out that for Indigenous women and women of color it is important to fight equally for (1) the right to have a child; (2) the right not to have a child; and (3) the right to parent the R children we have, as well as to control our birthing It is important to fight for options, such as midwifery. (1) the right to have a child; (2) the We also fight for the necessary enabling conditions to right not to have a child; and (3) the right to parent the children we have. realize these rights. This is in contrast to the singular focus on abortion by the pro-choice movement. Reproductive Justice says that the ability of any woman to determine her own reproductive destiny is linked directly to the conditions in her community—and these conditions are not just a matter of individual choice and access. Reproductive justice addresses the social reality of inequality, specifically, the inequality of opportunities that we have to control our reproductive destiny. One of the key problems addressed by Reproductive Justice is the isolation of abortion fi"om other social justice issues that concern communities of color: issues of economic justice, the environment, immigrants' rights, disability rights, discrimination based on race and sexual orientation, and a host of other community-centered concems. 14 off oiiT b a c k s vol 36 / no 4 These issues directly affect an individual woman's decision-making process. By shifting the focus to reproductive oppression—the control and exploitation of women, girls and individuals through our bodies, sexuality, labor and reproduction—rather than a narrow focus on protecting the legal right to abortion, we are developing a more inclusive vision of how to build a new movement. Because reproductive oppression aflfects women's lives in multiple ways, a multi-pronged approach is needed to fight this exploitation and advance the well-being of women and girls. There are three main fi-ameworks for fighting reproductive oppression: 1. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, w h i c h deals with service delivery 2. REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, which addresses legal issues, and 3. REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE, which focuses on movement building. Although these frameworks are distinct in their approaches, they work together to provide a comprehensive solution. Ultimately, as in any movement, all three components—service, advocacy and organizing—are crucial. Reproductive Justice focuses on organizing women, girls and their commtinities to challenge structural power inequalities in a comprehensive and transformative process of empowerment. The Reproductive Justice analysis offers a framework for empowering women and girls that is relevant to every American family. Instead of focusing on the means—a divisive debate on abortion and birth control that neglects the real-life experiences reproductive justice of women and girls—the reproductive justice analysis focuses on the ends: better lives for women, healthier families, and sustainable communities. This is a clear and consistent message for the movement. Using this analysis, we can integrate multiple issues and bring together constituencies that are multi-racial, multi-generational and multi-class in order to build a more powerful and relevant grassroots movement. How Reproductive Justice Can Transform the Pro-Choice Movement There is virtually no city or town where local prochoice women are not grappling with how to work together across fissures of race and class, especially white women working with women of color. Reproductive justice builds a theoretical bridge between these two forces. Despite the growing documentation and analysis of and by women of color and our role in the movement, the central question now is can women of color come from an autonomous space, work collectively together, and move beyond the "turmoil, confusion, and political struggle" (M. Fried) that characterizes the pro-choice movement? Can we avoid replicating these tensions among women of color? The forces of competition are much stronger than the forces of collaboration in this current funding and political climate. SisterSong is the fifth and longestlived attempt since the 1980s to build a national coalition of women of color in the reproductive rights/health/justice movement. are understandably resistant to having the choice/ privacyfi^ameworkdisputed within the movement. As explained by a woman of color organizer for the March for Women's Lives: "When we try to explain how choice is an inappropriate term even for many white women, some allies—especially older feminists—^take offense. They feel as though they had been fighting for "choice" for the past 30 years and that it was insulting to tell them that choice was not inclusive of many women of color, lowincome, and gay and lesbian communities." Some critics believe that by expanding to " ' a more inclusive definition of Reproductive Justice, women of color are ^gnaling reduced support for abortion nghts. ' Some critics belJeve that by expanding to a more inclusive ^^f^^^ f Reproductive ,. r* "«"«»•»«* Nothing could be further from ''"stice, women of color are the truth. Expanding support signaling reduced support for for abortion rights can best abortion rights. Nothing could be be done by bringing in new voices and perspectives to the further from the truth. movement and connecting to other social justice issues—a process of inclusion, rather than the politics of exclusion women of color have experienced. Reproductive justice is not an exclusive analysis that only applies to women of color. To achieve broad social change that drives the political and legal decision making in our country, it must be inclusive so that the mainstream and the marginalized find common ground. This is one of the slowIt is not SisterSong's role to be the only or est processes of social change, but is ultimately even the primary vehicle for mobilizing women of required. This is similar to how the Civil Rights color or transforming the mainstream for that mat- movement required the participation in and acter, but we see a specific role we can play in helpceptance by white society until the value of racial ing to revitalize and unite the domestic movement. equality became normative. Reproductive justice We organize from the margins to the center, rather draws attention to cultural and socio-economic than from the bottom to the top, to create longinequalities because everyone does not have equal term changes in ways people think about race, opportunity to participate in society's cultural rights and reproduction. Our work will produce discourses or public policy decisions based on a specific benefit: connecting issues and working cultural and economic values, such as abortion, across social movements because issues that affect midwifery and mothering. the reproductive health of women are large and For example, SisterSong believes that one of varied. Reproductive justice is no universal soluthe key elements driving restrictions on abortion tion, but it is a fresh approach to creating unifying is race-based thinking by opponents influenced and intersectional language with which to build by the white supremacist movement. They are bridges. It is SisterSong's intent to start conversavisibly agitated about controlling the sexual and tions about reproductive justice in political organi- reproductive behaviors of white youth, with a zations, religious groups and marginal groups. special focus on young women. Their mixed mesWe expect the reproductive justice analysis to sages of abstinence coupled with restrictions on be controversial because it involves new patterns of abortion and access to contraception can lead to thinking. Many people in the pro-choice movement only one outcome: more children by uninformed vol 36 / no 4 off o u r b a c k s 18 reproductive justice young people that actually increases birth rates and the transmission of sexual diseases. The participation of white allies in SisterSong's base is not only desired, but required, to achieve the normative quality in American society we wish Reproductive Justice to achieve. One of the tensions within the reproductive rights community is the uneasy alliance between those who support fertility control for women as a means of women's empowerment as their primary goal, and those who support fertility control for women as a means of controlling population growth. Both sectors are, of course, united in their opposition to those who oppose women's rights and family planning, albeit for different reasons. SisterSong is hoping for a political realignment of groups in the reproductive rights movement: those Beginning in 1973 with tiie Roe vi Wade decision, women of(X)lor (e.g., the National Council of Negro Women) saw some problems with the term "choice" popularized by the mainstream women's movement. "Choice has masked the ways that laws, policies and pubiic officials punish or reward the reproductive activity of different groups of women differently," states historian Rickie Solinger, affirming the skepticism of women of color. Prior to the 1980s, women of color reproductive health activists organized primarily against sterilization abuse and teen pregnancy, although many were involved in early activities to legalize abortion because of the disparate impact iiiegai abor-, tion had in African American, Puerto Rican and Mexican communities. The 1980s and 1990s was a period of explosive autonomous organizing by women of color establishing their own reproductive health organizations. Women of color mostly refrained from joining mainstream pro-choice organizations, but preferred to orgariize autonomous women of coior organizations more directly responsive to the needs of their communities. Women of color searched for another conceptual framework that would convey our multiple values: the right to have and not to have a child—the many ways our rights to be mothers and parent our children are constantly threatened. We believed these intersectionai values separated us from the liberal pro-choice movement in the U.S., which was preoccupied with maintaining the legality of abortion and privacy rights. We were aiso skeptical about the motivations of some in the 16 off our tacks vol 36 / no 4 supportive of fertility control vs. those supportive of reproductive justice. This may shift the boundaries of the debate from the pro-choice/anti-abortion divide because SisterSong is modeling how to gain and keep people who are personally opposed to abortion in the reproductive justice movement. Significant changes in the pro-choice movement that will provide opportunities for SisterSong will probably be brought about by many factors that causally affect each other. It is beyond the scope of this article to detail all of these. It is equally difficult to predict any one theory or factor that will change the pro-choice movement. There is no singular or mono-causal explanation that can help SisterSong develop a predictive model that leads directly from training to transformation. Nor is there a magic bullet with which to bring pro-choice movement who seemed to be more interested in popuiation restrictions than in women's empowerment. They promoted dangerous contraceptives and coercive sterilizations, and were mostly siient about the economic inequalities and power imbalances between the developed and the developing worlds that constrain women's choices. Women of coior felt dosest to ttie progressive wing of the women's movement that did articulate demands for abortion access who shared our class analysis, and even doser to the radical feminists who demanded an end to steriiization abuse and who shared our critique of population control. Yet we lacked a framework that aligned reproductive rights with sodal justice in an intersectionai way, bridging the multiple domestic and global movements to which we belonged. We found the answer in the global women's health movement through the voices of women from the Global South. Women of color from the U.S. participated in ail of the international conferences and significant events of the global feminist movement. Often supported by the International Women's Health Coalition, the Women's Global Network for Reproductive Rights, and visionary funders like Ford and the Ms. Foundation, women of color from the U.S. were able to form small but significant deiegations to these meetings. The SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Health Collective was fomied in 1997 by sixteen autonomous women of color organizations, using human rights as a unifyingframeworkfor the Coilective. Human rights CONTINUED ON PAGE 18 reproductive justice about the changes quickly. It is also impossible cal repression, violence against abortion providto predict the precise processes and mechanisms ers, restrictions on pregnant women and distracof social transformation that will be achieved by tions such as the War on Terror will help decide using the reproductive justice framework. both the direction and pace of these changes. Among the external and internal factors to be Another significant factor is the way technology considered are (1) increased repression of the is changing how we organize our base, particularly American public (the Patriot Act, the War Against in terms of print vs. electronic communications. Terror, domestic wiretapping, economic hardship); The 2003 SisterSong national conference was the (2) pressure from the right (increasing restricfirst event we've ever organized that was mobilized tions on abortion and birth control); (3) pressure nearly entirely by the Internet, and it produced from within the movement (the Saletan articles more than 600 attendees. We were forced to use on moving to the right); (4) leadership changes the Internet because of our limited resources for (Cecile Richards is now head of Planned Parentprinting and mailing. We were very concerned that hood, replacing Gloria we would not reach a sigFeldt, while Nancy Keenan nificant portion of our base is now head of NARAL Instead of focusing on the means— if we did not use more traPro-Choice America replacditional forms of outreach a divisive debate on abortion and ing Kate Michelman); because of the widely-provbirth controi that negiects the (5) organizing by women en digital divide in comof color such as through reai-iife experiences of women munities of color. In fact, Incite!; and (6) organizand giris—the reproductive justice we were mildly surprised ing by young women, such at how electronic commuanalysis focuses on the ends: better as in the Young Women's nications were augmented lives for women, healthier famiiies Collaborative. Each of these by local activists using the and sustainabie communities. factors deserves examinamore traditional means of tion, but probably one of local meetings, telephone the most significant internal outreach, and printed mater. . .. , . uuucagu, anu pnniea mat tactors promismg change m the pro-choice moverial. Another technological aid was the use of free ment from SisterSong's point of view is the recent conference call services to host monthly national leadership transitions at the top of two pro-choice conference calls to mobilize for the March for organizations because these are major developWomen's Lives. Although a great deal of resources ments within our base. were spent on travel and speaking tours as necesWe are working in collaboration with several sary, the Internet mobilized the overwhehning mainstream organizations, and many Planned majority of the March participants. In fact, we were Parenthood women of color leaders are also very nervous in the March national office because members of SisterSong. We believe that Planned the phones were eerily silent in the days leading up Parenthood and NARAL are coming to their own to the March. Our staff did most of their organizconclusions about the limitations of the choice ing over the Internet, probably because they were framework. That may be one of the reasons that relatively younger than the March leaders and more the progressive wing of Planned Parenthood familiar with and dependent on the technology. seized the opportunity to sponsor the "ReproducWhile this development was certainly effective, tive Justice for All" public policy conference in it does raise the question of whether we are losing November 2005 at Smith College. anything in these ubiquitous enabling technologies Another primary precipitating pressure will in terms of face-to-face and spoken communicabe the advances made by opponents of women's tions. Although technology is speeding up the rights, such as the confirmations of Samuel Alito changes we experience, it can't do it on its own. and John Roberts to the Supreme Court. LegislaBuilding a base must have a spark—an idea—that tive, judicial and electoral losses may act as catais enormously appealing. That is the role we see lysts to either fiirther divide the pro-choice movethe concept of Reproductive Justice playing. More ment or unite it. Social change in the reproductive than 25,000 Internet hits on the term "Reproduchealth/rights/justice movement can either move tive Justice" is gratifyingly significant, but we are to the right or the left, toward fiirther population in the processing of determining precisely what control for targeted groups of people or increased that number means in terms of building movefreedom for more women. Factors such as politiment. This may represent an insurgent political vol 36 / no 4 off OTir b a c k s 17 reproductive justice movement without discrete stages of development or change. What is clear is that it will not be led by the elites of the pro-choice movement, but instead builds on our collective structural power as women of color—the fact that our locations are in the various socio-economic-political structures that lie at these intersections, along with our allies in the mainstream who understand that we are compelled to move forward with a new vision to guide our movement. While most resources are located in the hands of the mainstream pro-choice organizations (our own elite), it is grassroots organizations like SisterSong that offer the most promise for significant social change. In the three years since our 2003 national conference, the phrase "Reproductive Justice" has undergone instant proliferation. An example is the previously mentioned Planned Parenthood Federation conference in November 2005 called "Reproductive Justice for All" which brought together 400 attendees. SisterSong was invited to give one of the education was provided to all collective members and integrated from the outset into SisterSong's work. We also integrated botii self-help and community organizing into our foundation. The phrase "Reproductive Justice" became prominent in our first national conference, which we held in November 2003 in Atianta. The conference was called tiie SisterSong National Women of Color Reproductive Health and Sexual Rights Conference based on our experiences intemationally, where the reproductive health and sexual rights framework was powerftjily articulated. At that 2003 conference, we sponsored plenary and workshop sessions to explore the concept of Reproductive Justice. Among ttie great thinkers we were privileged to have worked on this were Dorothy Roberts, Eveline Shen.ByllyeAvery.Malika Saada Saar, Luz Alvarez Martinez, Jatrice Gaittiers, AdHane Fugh Berman, Jael Silliman, Rosalinda Palacios, and Barbara Smith. After the conference, SisterSong decided to use the concept of Reproductive Justice as our central organizing strategy for work in the United States because it emerged as a unifying and popular framework among our base. The cun"ent organizational structure of SisterSong reflects our origin as a union of pre-existing, autonomous women of color organizations. SisterSong does not have chapters as do NARAL and NOW, or linked affiliates the way Planned Parenthood does. Instead, SisterSong sparks new organizations, L 18 off o\ir backs vol 36 / no 4 opening presentations at the conference to help set the defining platform for the deliberations, but we felt like conductors whose train had left the station without us because while we were oflFering our reproductive justice analysis for consideration by the movement, we are concerned about the unequal distribution of power and resources in the movement and the potential for co-opting our vision without respecting the leadership of women of color. This conference, among other events, is compelling SisterSong to focus on providing Reproductive Justice trainings to both our base within SisterSong and to our allies among other women of color networks such as Incite! and our allies in the prochoice movement because our fear is that they will not Mly integrate the intersectional, human rightsbased approach SisterSong promotes, but merely substitute the phrase "reproductive justice" where previously they said "pro-choice." If this is allowed to happen, this will be a significant setback, because reproductive justice will be watered down to such as Pittsburgh New Voices for Reproductive Justice and the Boston Women of Color Coalition for Reproductive Justice. Some groups have re-organized to reflect a reproductive justice focus, due to the influence of SisterSong: Asians and Pacific Islanders for Reproductive Health re-named themselves Asian Communities for Reproductive Justice, and the Los Angeles Reproductive Justice Coalition also changed its name and focus. However, newer activists within SisterSong who do not belong to an existing woman of cok)r organization in their city are asking SisterSong to consider the development of a chapter structure to clone SisterSong locally. We are considering how to address this unmet need among our base. SisterSong is pioneering ttie application of our intersectional analysis to the reproductive rights movement, and we are spreading our ideas to other social justice movements. This is familiar tenBin for women of color because we have a long histoiy of oppositional politics in temis of the mainsfream pro-choice movement. We are also sparidng new leadership in thereproductivejustice movement that is challenging the paradigm of individualism and privacy that is sacred in the pro-choice movement. We are also creating bridges for the traditional civil rights movement to develop language affimiing their support for women's rights. It is extremely significant that groups like the NAACPandMALDEFare now usingreproductivejustice language in ttieir work. reproductive justice where it is conflated with the previous pro-choice paradigm and lose its potential for building new movement. Thus, we are at a critical historical juncture—a teachable moment—for which SisterSong will work to develop the tools, the materials, and the resources to help guide this transformation. Conclusion In order to address the needs and issues of a diverse group of women while acknowledging the layers of oppressions that our communities face, particularly those who do not have access to privilege, power, and resources, we must build a new movement for Reproductive Justice in the United States. This movement must work to protect everyone, including those who have more privilege. It also must integrate the needs of grassroots communities into policy and advocacy efforts and create opportunities for new leaders to emerge within our communities to increase the capacity, effectiveness and scope of our movement. Perhaps most importantly, SisterSong must infuse the movement with creativity, innovation and vision. The key strategies for achieving this vision include supporting the leadership and power of the most excluded groups of women, girls and individuals within a culturally relevant context. This will require holding ourselves and our allies accountable to the integrity of this vision. We have to address directly the inequitable distribution of power and resources within the movement, holding our allies and ourselves responsible for constructing principled, collaborative relationships that end the exploitation and competition within our movement. We also have to build the social, political and economic power of low-income women. Indigenous women, women of color, and their communities so that they are full participating partners in building this new movement. This requires integrating grassroots issues and constituencies that are multi-racial, multi-generational and multiclass into the national policy arena, as well as into the organizations that represent the movement. SisterSong is building a network of allied social justice and human rights organizations who integrate the reproductive justice analysis into their work. We have to use strategies of self-help and empowerment to help the women who receive our services understand that they are vital emerging leaders in the determining the scope and direction of the social change we wish to catalyze. The next SisterSong national event for mobilizing women of color through the reproductive justice framework will be our second national conference in celebration of our 10* anniversary in 2007. Entitled "Let's Talk About Sex," the conference will be held May 31-June 2, 2007, in Chicago, Illinois hosted by African American Women Evolving, and more than 1,200 people are expected to attend. Since the right to have sex is a topic rarely discussed when addressing reproductive health and rights issues, SisterSong believes that sexual prohibitions are not only promoted by moral conservatives in this country, but also by reproductive rights advocates who fail to promote a sex-positive culture. Sex is not just for pro-creation and sexual pleasure—it is a human right. We would like to create a pro-sex space for the pro-choice movement and we hope you will join us. Reproductive justice is the result of 20 years of creative envisioning by women from around the world who understand that reproductive health issues cannot be separated from the interiocking systems of oppression women face globally. By bringing these lessons home to the United States, SisterSong is hoping to win concrete changes on the individual, community, institutional and societal levels that will improve the lives of women, our families and our communities. ® LORETTA J. ROSS is a founder and the national coordinator of the SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Health Collective, composed of 70 women of color organizations across the country. She was the codirector of the April 25, 2004, National March for Women's Lives in Washington D.C, the largest protest in U.S. history. She is also the co-author o/Undivided Rights: Women of Color Organizing for Reproductive Justice (2004, South End Press), reviewed on page 82 of this issue. "Let's Talk About Sex" May 31-June 2,2007 The next SisterSong national event for mobilizing women of color through the reproductive justice framework will be our second national conference in celebration of our 10th anniversary. For information on SisterSong's Reproductive Justice trainings scheduled around the country, contact trainings@sistersong.net. vol 3 6 / n o 4 off o-ur backs 19
Purchase answer to see full attachment