A Letter to Representative Perry

As an involved constituent from Harwich, Massachusetts currently pursuing my undergraduate degree at Smith College, I would like to raise a concern that I have not yet heard addressed by Representative Perry.

There is a very broad base of support for genocide and mass atrocities prevention, especially on Cape Cod.  There are two student-led groups that focus primarily on genocide and mass atrocities prevention, and a much wider human rights constituency across all of the Cape.  As one of the past leaders of the STAND chapter at Harwich High School, and as a current National Outreach Coordinator for STAND, the student-led division of the Genocide Intervention Network, I would like Representative Perry to speak on the subject of genocide and mass atrocities termination and prevention, particularly in Sudan.

There has been an ongoing genocide occurring in the Darfur region of Sudan since 2003, claiming the lives of over 400,000 innocents, and sending millions more across borders and into internal refugee camps in Sudan.  At the same time, the government in Khartoum has been marginalizing the people of Southern Sudan, who experts believe will vote to secede from Sudan after a referendum this January.  Scholars and activists believe that the Obama administration is not taking firm enough action to ensure a legitimate and peaceful referendum is ensured, and that the current US policy includes all incentives for the government in Khartoum and no pressures, and is completely sidelining Darfur.

As a member of Congress, what will Representative Perry do to ensure that both incentives and pressures are implemented in US Sudan policy, and that there be a focus on all of Sudan and not just the North-South issue?

I look forward to hearing more.

In Peace,
MacKenzie

---
MacKenzie J. Hamilton

National Outreach Coordinator
STAND: Student-led Division of Genocide Intervention Network
Smith College, Class of 2013
(774) 722 2861
http://www.standnow.org
mhamilton@standnow.org

Student Activists Across US Hold Candlelit Vigils to Propose Change in Sudan Policy

By MacKenzie J. Hamilton, STAND

Alexandra Johnson, STAND
Outreach Coordinator, holds vigil in GA

Last week, President Obama met with U.S. special envoy to Sudan Gen. Scott Gration and other high level officials to discuss Sudan policy.  In short, it did not go as well as activists hoped, and the proposed policy sidelined Darfur and lacked necessary diplomatic and economic pressures on the government in Khartoum.  U.S. ambassador to the UN Susan Rice offered a dissenting opinion, urging the President to focus on all of Sudan and include both incentives and pressures on the Khartoum government.

The student movement to end genocide agreed with Ambassador Rice’s proposal and set about urging President Obama to make good on his campaign promises and focus on an all-inclusive Sudan policy, complete with pressures for the genocidal regime.  To show their support for Ambassador Rice and their solidarity with the people of Sudan, they held vigils all across the country, including outside of Vice President Biden’s residence in Washington, DC, Boston, New York City, North Carolina, Georgia, Michigan, California, and Georgia to name only a few.

Hundreds of students mobilized to urge our government to action in only two days, including students on Cape Cod in Massachusetts.  I took the initiative along with upSTANDer Andie Ramirez, former president of Harwich High School STAND and a first year at Providence College, to coordinate a vigil and peaceful protest.  Candidate for MA State Senate, Dan Wolf, and candidate for MA State House of Representatives attended to show their support, as well as three men from Southern Sudan, Gabriel Bol Deng, Garang Mayoul and Koor Garang.

Andie Ramirez, Providence College, coordinates Cape Cod Vigil &
sends a message to the US government

At the end of the night, after candles were lit and the urgency of the situation was discussed, participants took action by calling Vice President Biden and urging him to weigh in on Sudan policy, make good on his campaign promises, and urge President Obama to take a firmer stance on US Sudan policy.  If edits to the policy are not made before Obama signs it in, it could cause huge problems for the country of Sudan in the future.  Already we are seeing an upsurge of violence in the Darfur region of Sudan, and with the Southern Referendum coming to a vote in January, the public has reason to worry.

What you should do right now!

It’s not too late!  Call 1-800-GENOCIDE today to connect to Vice President Biden’s office and urge the US government to focus on all of Sudan and implement a strategy with both incentives and pressures on the Khartoum government in Sudan.

-Mac at Smith

aka:

MacKenzie J. Hamilton

Outreach Coordinator

STAND: Student-led Division of Genocide Intervention Network

(774) 722-2861

http://www.standnow.org

mhamilton@standnow.org

Senator Kerry on UNSC Commission of Inquiry in Burma

Yesterday, I called both Senator Brown and Senator Kerry’s offices to ask them to sign onto the Gregg-Feinstein letter in support of a UNSC Commission of Inquiry into war crimes and crimes against humanity in Burma.  Neither Senator ended up signing on, but that’s not the point of this blog entry.  The point of this entry is to express Senator Kerry’s views on Burma and why he chose not to sign onto the letter.

Mac Hamilton, Adriana Jaimes, and Ann Nguyen lobby Scott Brown's office

I called and asked for Frank Januzzi, Kerry’s head of Foreign Relations.  I expected to be forwarded to his voicemail, but to my surprise, they forwarded me straight to him.  I expressed my ask for Senator Kerry to sign onto the letter, and engulfed myself in a 20-minute conversation with this man, who was full of information and incredibly helpful.

He explained to me that Senator Kerry was hugely supportive of US action for Burma, but was hesitant to sign on to the letter for a few reasons:

1. He thinks that taking such direct action might hurt an eventual return to civilian rule.
2. As it stands, the junta can’t travel to US or Europe -- would this be too direct considering the fact that we’ve already barred them from entering our country?
3. Not sure whether this will be good leverage or be counter-productive, telling the current rulers that we want to see them thrown in jail.  Could hurt diplomatic relations, especially if Kerry is a signatory.
4. Possibility of reciprocal amnesty, similar to South Africa model

I was assured that whether or not Senator Kerry signed on to the letter, he would not oppose a commission of inquiry.  Rather, he was wary as the chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, because he will have to work with the junta in the future, and is afraid it will hurt future leverage with them.  He feels that he must preserve bargaining power by not being named as a person trying to imprison the junta.  He is trying to decide where is best to hold his weight as the Chair of the committee.

Mr. Januzzi remained on the phone with me for a while longer, discussing different situations where one might support a commission of inquiry and situations where the opposite might be the most helpful. For example, in Cambodia, where we have just seen four perpetrators of the Cambodian genocide arrested, in contrast to Vietnam ,where we supported normalization and did not pursue incrimination for past wrongdoings.  In short, different tactics work better in different situations, which is not to say that Senator Kerry doesn’t support the eventual incrimination of the junta in Burma, but perhaps not at this time.

Adriana Jaimes and Ann Nguyen rockin' it at Kerry's office

He also took the time to fill me in on what Senator Kerry is doing for Burma, as well as his past support for civilians in Burma.  Specifically, he highlighted the Kerry amendment in the Jade Act, and a letter he is currently drafting to Secretary Clinton, pleading once again for the administration to appoint a special envoy to Burma, as the man who currently is working on the Burma issue is in charge of all US policy in Southeast Asia--quite a large job.

It’s also interesting to note that Mr. Januzzi began our conversation referring to Burma as Myanmar, but changed throughout the conversation as I asserted the name Burma.  In short, I must say that I’m proud that I am a constituent of an office that will take the time to explain complex views on issues such as Burma, and that Senator Kerry is actively working to alleviate suffering in Burma.  I was engaged and treated as though my opinion was truly valuable to the office.  I intend to keep in contact with Mr. Januzzi and keep updated on Senator Kerry’s status on the issue.

-Mac at Smith

Of July the Fourth, Seventeen Seventy Six

(I realized that this has been sitting here unposted for quite some time; hope it's still relevant, even though the 4th was over a week ago!)



I'm somewhat interested in what the 4th of July--Independence Day has become for this nation.  In fact, it seems we've gotten the date quite wrong.  John Adams wrote to his wife that,


"...the Day is past. The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America.


I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more..."


Clearly, John Adams was incorrect.  Not on all points but on the one point.  The resolution was adopted on July 2, 1776, although slight changes were received and voted on on July 4, 1776.  Because independence was voted on on July 2nd, it would make much more sense for the holiday to take place on this day.  The full Declaration was dated July 4, but was not fully signed until August 2.  The celebrations he pinned correctly.  Pomp and Parade, Sports, Guns, Bonfires, and Illuminations certainly all take place on this day.  But what else?  It seems to have turned into a good excuse to spend the whole day drinking and eating 'American' food--hamburgers and hotdogs (which are both German).


Jefferson wrote,


"The pusillanimous idea that we had friends in England worth keeping terms with, still haunted the minds of many. For this reason those passages which conveyed censure on the people of England were struck out, lest they should give them offense. The clause too, reprobating the enslaving the inhabitants of Africa, was struck out in compliance to South Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain the importation of slaves, and who on the contrary still wished to continue it. Our Northern brethren also I believe felt a little tender under these censures; for tho' their people have very few slaves themselves yet they had been pretty considerable carriers of them to others."


Interesting to see what changes were made.  And what a word, pusillanimous!  Thomas Jefferson and John Adams both ended up passing away on July 4, 1826, the 50th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.  Adams' last words were reportedly, "Thomas Jefferson survives!" although Jefferson had passed away a few hours before.  The next year on July 4th, slavery was abolished in New York state, something Jefferson might have been very conflicted on.


-Mac at Smith

Majestic Elephants

So I was on Stumble Upon today, and I came across these incredible photos.  I just couldn't not post them here.  Incredible.  Elephants may be my new favourite animal...  Click for a closer look.  I'm pretty sure all of these are for sale.  Available here.

As if i needed another reason to move to Africa :)

-Mac at Smith

"Women" "Ladies" and "Girls" -- Which terms are demeaning?

"I am not interested in women just because they're women.  I am interested, however, in seeing that they are no longer classed with children and minors."  -Crystal Eastman

Crystal Eastman… honestly I don’t know much about.  I’m going to have to do some research.  But this quote really hits home for me and probably for a whole lot of other women out there.  Though I’m sure this quote was said long ago when women were literally classed with children and minors, it’s often still done in practice.

[Edit: Crystal Eastman graduated from Vassar in 1903, and was a lawyer, antimilitarist, feminist, socialist, and journalist.  Incredible woman--wiki her]

I was speaking to a woman who works at the golf course today.  Her name is Ellen and she’s always been a really good friend to me, although we work in different departments.  She used to live in Northampton, and is a really incredible woman.  She's the club secretary, and part of her job is to edit the member’s newspaper, which is a hodgepodge of pieces by those who run the club—the Head Pro, the Clubhouse Manager, the Superintendent, the President of the club, etc. 

She came down today as she was about to leave a told me that she was going to retire on August first.  I my heart dropped but I gave her a congratulations—she really deserves the time to do what she wants.  She’s been working for x amount of years, and has never really had a chance to do what she wants to do.  She told me that she feels like a closeted feminist because of her age.  But she gets terribly offended by some of the things that men say around here.

For one thing, “ladies”.  Instead of “women’s league,” it is called the “ladies’ league,” here.  Now this might not seem like a bad thing unless you do some digging.  Because we have a men’s league it seems natural that you’d call the female equivalent the women’s league.  Men and women, ladies and gentlemen.  But the origin of the word “lady” is an old English word, which denotes a woman to whom homage or obedience is due, such as the wife of a lord or the mistress of a household.  If you look at it this way, the woman is being put down every time she is referred to as a lady.

Next, there’s one employee who’s been here for many years who refers to these women as ‘girls.’  “The girls are coming out to play,” “Here come the girls,” etc.  Now.  Ellen didn’t like this and nor do I.  Not that he meant any harm by it, he’s honestly a really nice guy, but rather clueless when it comes to things like this.  He’s older, and thinks he’s being friendly or fatherly or something.  Well, no.  No thank you.  A “girl” is a female child, or a young woman.  Alternatively, it is a term used to define a woman in terms of her significant other “his girl,” “Jesse’s girl,” etc.  These women are not children.  They are individuals who deserve to be treated as full members of the human race.

Furthermore, as the editor of the newsletter, she has to change a lot of the writing by the men in charge.  When they say “ladies” she changes it to “women”, when they say, “chairman” she changes it to “chair” etc.  The strength of this woman is amazing.  She never says a word to these men, but silently edits their words to her liking.  You can most certainly be a feminist without shoving it in anyone’s face, and sometimes that’s the way to get things done.  I can only wonder if these men ever notice her efforts.  Either way, it affects those that read the letter, for the more they view females as women and not ladies or girls, the more their views of these women might become more equal.

It’s really interesting how different people use feminism.  Some protest our male-dominated world by refusing to shave their legs.  Others protest by writing.  Others quietly change the words of men—as in newsletters or in legal documents—there are so many ways of resistance, passive or active, but they all make a difference.  Me, however, I’m loud.  I never shut up about my rights, about the plight of women, and about gender equality.  Sometimes this is a good thing, and something to be applauded, and other times it’s detrimental to the cause.  But I must say that I have the utmost respect for this woman and any other women who use these small but significant tools of protest.

And hopefully, thanks to her, I’ll think twice the next time I pick up the phone and say “Hello, beautiful lady!”  It will make a difference if I tell her instead, “Hello, beautiful woman!”

-Mac at Smith

Augusta National's Policy Against Women

I’m going to start this entry with another quote by Betty Friedan, which will link into my topic of today.

“Men are not the enemy, but the fellow victims.  The real enemy is women’s denigration of themselves.”  -Betty Friedan

Her point was that as long as women view themselves as victims and as second-class citizens, men are going to see them in that same light.  Women need to stand up and say. ‘Hey!  Women’s rights are human rights!’

I was having a discussion with a very good and well-educated man probably about a month ago about Augusta National’s policy against admitting women members.  (For those who don’t know, Augusta National is a private golf course, and the number one course in the United States.  One of the major championships, The Masters, is held there every year.)  It rather shocked me how adamantly he defended the course’s right to exclude women from membership.  But he kept hitting the same points.  Constitutionally, as a private organization, they have right to exclude whomever they want. 

I understand their rights fully.  I attend a private women’s institution that doesn’t admit anyone who has been born a man.  But as a course that hosts The Masters, a national tournament, and a course that profits from this tournament, they are making clear to the public their statement against women.  Their active practice of discrimination goes deeper than just allowing women to join the club.  It says that women are not good enough to be members of their esteemed institution.  In fact, they said the same thing to African Americans until 1990, but since women aren’t a minority group, they can get away with not allowing them in. 

I’m not saying that Boy Scouts of America should start admitting women, or that Girl Scouts should start admitting men.  Each of these groups has a clear aim, which is to help shape young minds into service-minded and oriented adults.  And they do this in an environment of a single gender, because it’s a place where these children can, presumably, be more comfortable and learn more about themselves.  Augusta National is different.  They are a club consisting of grown men whose average age is 72 and who, as businessmen, have no problem gaining money from women, but do have a problem with offering them equality at their prestigious club.

The man I was debating with, and who happens to know a lot about golf, pointed out that every single member of their club must be invited to be a member, and it was simply a matter of time until they invited a woman.  Well now.  At this course, the members consist mostly of the nation’s top businessmen (normally I would say and women, but in this case it does not apply).  Well, in 2002, the US Bureau of Labor stated that 7.9 percent of females in the workforce were among the top ranked in Fortune 500 companies, and 5.2 percent were among Fortune 500 top earners.  Clearly, it is an equality issue.  There are women who are just as competent as men in the business world, but the men are being picked over women as members of this club.

They won’t allow women membership, but they will allow them to play as guests and allow them in as spectators at The Masters.  Similarly, the corporate sponsors of The Masters clearly value the business of women, but choose to affiliate themselves with a club that denies membership to women.  I see this as a double standard.  Women’s money is good, but women themselves are not.  In response to this, Augusta National cancelled corporate sponsorship in 2003, but how did the event gain such national and international acclaim in the first place?  The corporate sponsors from previous years.

Furthermore, The Masters is one of PGA’s (Professional Golf Association)four major championships.  The PGA’s policy for tournament venues states that the host facility's "membership practices and policies do not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, religion or national origin.”  What??  What?!!  Clearly, Augusta National is the exception here, because it’s not “technically” a PGA tour event, but an “invitational”—similarly to the “invitation” they send to MEN in extension of membership.

Now I’m not a golfer, but I love golf.  I’ve grown up watching it, I’ve been around it all my life, and as I write this entry, it’s in my down time in my work in a bag room at a private course (a course which, though private, extends membership to women).  I understand Augusta’s right to exclude women from membership but that by no means makes it just for them to do so.

Yes, there are more pressing issues facing women today, but it would be an incredible statement for Augusta to (finally) admit a female member.  However, they had better choose her carefully, because if they choose someone with a similar disposition to my own, she might just decline.

-Mac at Smith

Betty Friedan, Marriage, and Gender

I feel so blessed to attend a college that brags alum like Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem.  It makes me think who these incredible womyn would have been had they not attended Smith College.  Would they still have been the well-written and versed activists that they became, or would they be hosting their revolutionary thoughts in their heads only?

Betty Friedan spoke my quote of the day, "If divorce has increased by one thousand percent, don't blame the women's movement.  Blame the obsolete sex roles on which our marriages were based."

What a beautiful quote.  It's difficult for me to put into words how I feel about marriage, because there are so many aspects to consider.  First of all, whether it's a traditional marriage between a man and a womyn or a marriage between two womyn, two men, or those who identify outside of the gender binary.  Do I ever want to get married?  I have no idea.  Right now it holds no great meaning to me.  The only reason I could think of to get married is honestly if I decided I wanted to have children to add some stability to their life.  I don't want to be a mother who hosts many sexual guests in my house.  I want to be in a relationship where my partner and me can both serve as stable parent figures in the child's life.  It may be old fashioned, but I think marriage is the easiest way for a child to know that they are in a family.  Which is why it's so important that gay marriage be recognized universally.

Marriage.  It's so difficult to define when a dictionary such as the New Oxford American Dictionary on my computer defines it as "the formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife."  Why the fixation of gender?  And why is husband always placed before wife, king before queen, boy before girl?  And don't tell me it's in alphabetical order.

Someone at my job the other day was talking to me about homosexuality.  He said something to the effect of, "Why can't they just put their dick in a girl?"  I told him it was not his nor anyone else's business what anyone did with their dick.  He retorted with, "But it's not natural… like they can't make children that way."  So?  I told him, Every time you have sex, is it to make children?  Plenty of straight couples don't have children and plenty of gay couples do.  "No, but man and woman were made…" I cut him off, saying we clearly had differing opinions and I'd prefer not to continue this pointless discussion with him.  LOVE IS LOVE.  I doubt if he'd known bout my omni-pan-bi-tri-quad-everything-queer sexuality that he would have started the discussion at all.  I find that in these situations I often have to bite my tongue, or I can't quite say what I mean.  But why is it anyone's business what people do with their sex lives and why?  Do your own thing but don't dictate what I or anyone else does.

You go, Betty Friedan.  You tell them.  Sex roles are what this world we live in is based upon.  Slowly, slowly, with the help of institutions such as Smith College, the world is beginning to change.  But womyn still make less money than men.  Companies still market toward womyn because womyn are the 'biggest consumers.'  Why is this?  Because they don't teach womyn's empowerment in schools.  Womyn are taught that they are only as valuable as men find them.  And that makes them only as valuable as their outward appearance.  Why would this ever be true?  Every womyn is beautiful, and every woman has the potential to be as smart as their male counterparts, if not smarter.  But time and time again they get put down.  By slurs.  By rude comments.  "Slut."  "Whore."  "Cunt."  "Bitch."  "Ho."  "Ugly."  And it starts early.  It starts as early as the men learn the words, and then they are used against one another.  More stereotypically beautiful girls put down the less stereotypically beautiful girls.  Although on the outside American culture seems to favor individuality, if you don't fit in, that's it for you.

Let me just say that thank god I chose to attend Smith College.  I can't even begin to think where I'd be if I attended a co-ed college or university.  I needed some time to just figure out who I was without the influence of men breathing down my neck and shouting my faults.  Or even whispering or suggesting my faults.  I needed to be with a group of intelligent, accepting people who would support me and who I morphed into.  That's precisely what I found.  I found a place where I could be a person regardless of my gender or sexual identity.

Without this, I wouldn't be the still-forming self-sufficient womyn that I am today and who will continue to search for answers until she's satisfied.  I wouldn't be seeing the open hearted and minded man that I am seeing right now.  I wouldn't be comfortable in my skin and in my body.  I am who I am and I am not perfect.  I am nowhere near.  But I am human.  I am beautiful and I am intelligent.  Just like you.  Just like everyone.

Keep questioning things, ladies and gents, humans and people!  If you don't question the society we live in, who will?

-Mac at Smith

Mac at Smith

So.  First post.  Here is where I tell you why I'm writing this blog in the first place.  Honestly, there have been many times in my life that I've thought would be good to start a blog.  I had one when I was much younger, and I blogged last summer while I was in Rwanda (I tried to blog every day, and it worked for a while until I got really caught up in day-to-day things).

But now I just want to write what I want when I want.  I want people to be able to see what I'm thinking and have thoughtful, provoking discussions.  I want o share cool quotes that I find, photos that I stumble upon, pieces that I write, videos I take, things I hear walking down the street.  So that is what I will do.

I don't really expect anyone to read this, but I guess some people really like reading blogs, especially those with lots of photos, so I'll see what I can do.

I'll leave you with this wicked cool photo.  I haven't quite decided what I think it means yet, but it has something to do with seeing the world through another's eyes.

-Mac at Smith