My Blog

With encouragement from friends and family, I am writing more and have launched a new blog.

The name of the blog is Scarpeta. The idea came from one of my biggest fans who wishes to remain anonymous, but since I’ve known him he has given me tremendous support and encouragement to write. write, write.

Scarpeta is a misspelling of the Italian word to soak up: like when you soak up the sauce of the pasta dish with bread at the end.

My blog will be what I’ve always written about: feminist stuff, satirical pieces, tributes to people I admire, liberal opinions, Jewish oriented articles and political criticisms. I put up some oldies that are still semi relevant.

Some of you will not like what I have to say, and I encourage you to let me know.

It would also mean a lot to me if you sent the blog on to friends and family.

You can follow this blog by clicking here

Or the blog itself can be found at scarpeta.blogspot.com

Thank you for your support!

xoxoxo

sharna

Without subtext

sharna: what do you think?
Abe Marcus: Democrats are going to tank this country.
Abe Marcus: They could have passed the bill but wouldn’t.
sharna: what?
Abe Marcus: check the stock market
sharna: but republicans
sharna: are the people who didn’t sign the bill
sharna: it was just a few democrats
sharna: explain your logic
Abe Marcus: they didn’t need the republicans to pass it. The got it changed to meet their wants and then they tank it.
Abe Marcus: sad day for the Democrats
sharna: why didn’t the republicans vote for their president’s bill?
Abe Marcus: the market crashes and the Democrats will be the cause
sharna: that logic is silly
sharna: but funny
Abe Marcus: Bush was being too liberal and sucked up to the democrats. the conservatives didn’t like the bill as he changed it to accommodate the Dems
Abe Marcus: BUT the Dems could have passed it
sharna: interesting
Abe Marcus: Bye I’m going to watch the Sox game.
sharna: bye
Abe Marcus: I still love you
sharna: i love you too
Abe Marcus: L’Shana Tovah
sharna: happy new year!

…………..
With subtext
sharna: what do you think? (is your money ok?)
Abe Marcus: Democrats are going to tank this country. (I hate Barack Obama)
Abe Marcus: They could have passed the bill but wouldn’t. (There is nothing you can do to convince me to vote for him. Especially that stupid Sarah Silverman video)
sharna: what? (here we go)
Abe Marcus: check the stock market (don’t worry about me, you’re the one who works for a not for profit)
sharna: but republicans (which I still can’t believe I’m related to one)
sharna: are the people who didn’t sign the bill (and you’re not one socially, thank God)
sharna: it was just a few democrats (and wtf is wrong with them?)
sharna: explain your logic (You’re the smartest person I know, so I’m going to give you a chance.)
Abe Marcus: they didn’t need the republicans to pass it. The got it changed to meet their wants and then they tank it. (inept liberals)
Abe Marcus: sad day for the Democrats (hahahaha)
sharna: why didn’t the republicans vote for their president’s bill? (I hate President Bush)
Abe Marcus: the market crashes and the Democrats will be the cause (told you so)
sharna: that logic is silly (interesting)
sharna: but funny (still not buying it)
Abe Marcus: Bush was being too liberal and sucked up to the democrats. the conservatives didn’t like the bill as he changed it to accommodate the Dems (I hate President Bush too)
Abe Marcus: BUT the Dems could have passed it (inept liberals)
sharna: interesting
Abe Marcus: Bye I’m going to watch the Sox game. (I’m a Cubs fan, but hoping for a crosstown series)
sharna: bye (I want to watch the Sox game)
Abe Marcus: I still love you (even though you are a Democrat, voting for Obama, and not coming home for Rosh Hashanah)
sharna: i love you too (unconditionally)
Abe Marcus: L’Shana Tovah (Maybe you’ll get married so your mother will get off my back about it)
sharna: happy new year! (make sure you watch your weight so you stay healthy. And Unlikely.)

And then life went on.

Six months later, I experienced a broken engagement. While my close friends and immediate family were amazing, most people were extremely uncomfortable - understandably I guess. Not Mrs. Fox. She called to check in, not in a nosy intrusive way, but just out of concern, and then invited me to her home for Shabbat lunch.

“Any time,” she said. “And please call me Bev.”

And then life went on.

Until today. Until Mrs. Fox passed away.

Mrs. Fox has touched the lives of many. As a wife, a mother, educator and community member she was loved and respected by all who knew her. She had a bounce to her step and an infinite amount of energy. And, when I did finally go to her house, for Sukkot lunch, I learned she was a fabulous cook – rivaled by her daughter Renana’s gift for baking

Whenever someone that I admire passes away, I think about how I can honor their memory. When my Bubbie died, I honored her by hosting meals for friends to celebrate Shabbat. When my Zadie died, I promised to be as generous as he was, giving charity to the homeless asking for a dollar because, as he used to say, “you never know who is the righteous one.”

I promise to honor Mrs. Fox by refusing to ignore injustice even when it would be easier to continue walking. I promise to make uncomfortable phone calls when someone has suffered: be it a break up or the loss of a loved one. I will comfort those in need to the best of my ability.

I have been lucky to know many amazing people who [hope to] influence change through politics, activism, volunteerism, teaching and preaching. However, what I learned from Mrs. Fox is that you change the world not through [only] addressing the meta issues, but by how you care for individuals in distress and need. I can’t help but think if every person in the world cared for one another the way that Mrs. Fox cared for the people she came into contact with, the global problems would work themselves out. Think about how many other people witnessed my scolding or knew about the broken engagement. They were all good people, but perhaps they were uncomfortable, perhaps they felt awkward, perhaps they didn’t have time. Mrs. Fox prioritized my well being, a virtual stranger, but nevertheless a stranger in need.

With the passing of Mrs. Fox, there is a little less benevolence in the world.

Unless.

Unless we transmit her recipes of kindness through our own selfless acts so that she lives on - not just in all of our hearts but the hearts of others who never knew her.

May her memory be for a blessing.

When John McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate, I, like many around the world, googled her and read the brimming news coverage featuring scattered details about her biography. I admit that even though she is a Republican, I couldn’t help but give kudos to John McCain for making such a “maverick” move. [How ridiculous is it that choosing a woman is seen as unusual given women make up more than half of the population, but regardless it was bold given that only one other woman has ever been nominated.]

And then her speech! I found myself enjoying her jabs at Barack Obama. Yeah, small town people are awesome. Yeah, she probably does know a thing or two being governor so it’s fine that she is a heart beat away from the presidency. Yeah, come to think of it, pit bulls are like hockey moms.

But Sarah Palin, with all her charisma and rhetoric prowess is most definitely dangerous. And I believe that Americans will see beyond the superficiality and recognize that the prospect of a McCain-Palin presidency will not lead to a safer America, but a more perilous one. Their legacy could include unsafe abortions, an increase in teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, continued environmental damage, a retraction of basic freedoms, a continuance of the health care crisis, and more failed foreign policy degrading the United States’ reputation as a world leader.

McCain, no matter how independent minded he was at some point, has recently switched his stance on a woman’s right to choose. He has always been “Pro Life” but until recently he was opposed to overturning Roe v. Wade. If he is elected president, and pressured to appoint conservative judges, there is a real possibility that women’s lives will be in danger if forced to perform unsafe abortions.

You would think that the “Pro Life” crew would want women not to have unplanned pregnancies in the first place. Sarah Palin supports abstinence only sex education. Again, this is dangerous for our young people. Putting aside teen pregnancy, an abstinence only curriculum does not provide young people with the information that they need to prevent contracting sexually transmitted diseases.

Besides STDs, expect more kids to develop asthma due to Republican disregard of environmental protections. Watch wildlife and sea creatures die if Republicans expand drilling.

Freedom will suffer from a terminal illness as the Patriot Act is renewed under a Republican presidency.

Horrible diseases will continue to kill as progress is stunted without federal funds for stem cell research.

And those who contract those diseases will not be able to afford healthcare because the Republicans are not committed to providing affordable health insurance to all Americans, just as they are not committed to improving public education (with vouchers reducing fund for schools).

With joblessness rising, the subprime mortgage mess, instability in Georgia, Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan, the security of our country both domestically and abroad cannot be left to a senator who has compromised his values to appease the Republican Right and a governor who has the hubris to think that God supports her policies.

While both Palin and McCain are likeable and even worth admiring, if elected their policies will make America a worse place four years from now.

The last time I thought about Elizabeth Edwards before the news that
her husband had an affair as reported correctly by the National
Enquirer was when Tony Snow, former press secretary and Fox News
Anchor, succumbed to colon cancer.

Elizabeth Edwards, who herself is battling cancer, wrote a column for
Newsweek.com about Tony Snow. I happened to read the column because I
was consumed by Snow’s death. I’m not sure why. Perhaps it’s because my
dad had liver cancer this year and thanks to amazing medical care and
luck or God or the stars is cancer free and doing great. Perhaps I
wondered why my dad survived and Tony Snow did not. Who or what decides
these things?

Elizabeth Edwards is back in the spotlight and there is much commentary
about how her husband’s infidelity has affected her, how gross of an
act it is given her cancer, and inevitably some will question how a
modern, intelligent woman can stick by a scumbag cheating husband.

I believe the answers are given in the Newsweek column.

Read the entire article here; http://www.newsweek.com/id/146121/output/print  and if you want, come back here to read my thoughts.

Elizabeth Edwards wrote, rather obtusely, that opposites shouldn’t
unite to benefit only during times of an imminent threat be it the war
on terrorism or cancer. Mankind should unite because unity leads to
progress, leads to cures and leads to peace. When opposing sides work
for the greater good everyone benefits.

And while Elizabeth and John may have been on opposite sides of the
battlefield in their marriage during the past couple of years, she
stood with him to move America forward.

Elizabeth Edwards, when she found out about her husband’s affair in
2006, decided that the betrayal was not reason enough to break up her
beautiful family or to prevent her husband from his political
missionary work which included helping the working class and providing
universal health care. Whether you or I doubt his sincerity doesn’t
matter. She believed and believes in him. She believes in his cause so
much so that despite his cheating, despite the fact that she learned
that she is dying, she decided to work on something that she felt was
bigger than herself.

Whatever our judgment of John Edwards, his wife, when she could have
avenged his infidelity by ruining his political career, instead chose
to unite with him and unite with his supporters.

And personal gain just doesn’t seem like a likely motive. She is
incredibly wealthy. If anything, the stress of the campaign can’t be
great for her health.

Elizabeth Edwards wrote in Newsweek: "So why do we have such trouble
turning what we have in common into common cause? There will always be
fault lines where we just disagree, but can’t we find—maybe in our
founding documents—the things on which we do agree and work from there
instead of starting always, always perched as soldiers along those
fault lines?"

At age 60, Elizabeth Edwards is choosing not to battle her husband.
It’s not a battle, to her, worth fighting. Whatever we think about it
or John Edwards, her reasoning goes far beyond the cliché that she’s
simply “sticking by her man.”

She is sticking by much more than that.

I have had conflicting feelings over the Supreme Court’s decision that the hand gun ban in Washington D.C. is unconstitutional.

Unless I’ve misheard the local news, there are deaths or injuries due to gun violence, in a city which has the ban, just about every day.

Therefore, is this decision even relevant? The Mayor of Chicago thinks so.

"Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society?" Daley asked while speaking at a Navy Pier event. "If [the justices] think that’s the answer, then they’re greatly mistaken. Then why don’t we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun and we’ll settle it in the streets?"(Daley Vows to Fight for Chicago’s Gun Ban)

The new Chicago police superintendent was also angry about the ruling:

"From a law enforcement perspective, this will no doubt make a police officer’s job more challenging than it already is, particularly since a firearm is used in 75 percent of all murders committed in the city of Chicago."  (Daley Vows to Fight for Chicago’s Gun Ban)

And the above quote is exactly why this decision is not tugging violently at my liberal heart strings. There simply is not clear cut evidence that the gun ban has reduced violent crime. If someone wants to kill someone else, or if someone feels he needs a gun for protection, he will acquire one, no matter the ban.

The Chicago Police Department seized more than 13,000 guns last year, but only a handful of people were arrested for violating the city’s handgun ban, records show. Chicago Police spokeswoman Monique Bond said 74 people were arrested in 2007 and 83 people in 2006 for failing to register their handguns, an ordinance violation. "Criminals will continue to carry guns, and law-abiding citizens will continue to keep them in their homes for self-defense," one commander said. (Cops: Few arrested for violating ban)

Still I can’t help but think that it’s a bad idea for every person in the city to have the ability to go out and buy a handgun for their personal use.

My concern has nothing to do with social justice. Hand gun violence affects the poor no matter if guns are banned or not.  In fact, I am very Republican about this issue. I fear that lifting the gun ban will affect my own personal safety.

The practical concern with this ruling is will an improbable lift of the ban lead to a proliferation of hand guns throughout the city of Chicago and cause my life to be at risk?  For example, when I cut someone off, and if he has road rage, is he going to shoot me, whereas before he might just have run me off the road? Or will my neighbor, who I’ve heard fight with his boyfriend, one day in a drunken rage shoot his lover with the gun he just purchased at the local gun shop, the bullet ricocheting somehow into my bedroom leading to my ultimate demise. If a Republican wins the next election, will the people in the high rise across the street shoot guns out their windows, and will a bullet slip through my open window leading to my paralysis?

The majority opinion argued that the right to own arms is based on the principle of self defense as provided by the Second Amendment. Assuming I would buy a gun, how would that help if someone shoots at me intentionally or unintentionally? Perhaps I should invest in my own type of missile defense system that I remember hearing about when the President of my childhood, Ronald Reagan led this country during the Cold War.

When the Second Amendment was written, were there high rises and urban crowding? Was there road rage? Were there even hand guns?

Chicago’s gun ban probably isn’t solving the tragic loss of life of inner city youth. This decision by the Supreme Court is merely a distraction from the hard work that needs to be done to fight poverty and gang violence.

With that said, here is my question: 
why is my right not be killed by a hand gun less valid than my right to own one?  I guess the right not to be killed by a handgun is not protected in the Bill of Rights. Although I do remember reading something about “life and liberty.”

sources:
(Daley Vows to Fight for Chicago’s Gun Ban)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-supreme-court-gun-banjun27,0,1997533.story?track=rss

(Cops: Few arrested for violating ban)
http://www.suntimes.com/news/24-7/1027974,CST-NWS-trace27.article

If you want to pass this on, it’s also posted at http://smarcus.blogs.friendster.com/my_blog/ .

Dear Mrs. Obama,

Lately you’ve been under a firestorm with accusations ranging from the notion that you hate whites to the hand bump that you gave to your husband after he clinched the democratic nomination was a terrorist symbol. The claims are outlandish and expose the Conservative Right’s pitiful attempt to battle against Senator Obama with the rhetoric of fear over insightful ideas. My concern is not over these attacks. I am hoping, perhaps idealistically, that the electorate will choose your husband over the war –failing-economy recessing-status quo candidate. Who I am worried about is you and what your husband’s campaign might try and do to you. My concern was fueled by the following, “As her husband’s general election campaign gets into full swing, Mrs. Obama is getting a subtle makeover,” as quoted in the June 18th front page article of the New York Times. 

Mrs. Obama, you don’t need a makeover. Don’t let the political spin doctors force you to soften your tone or change your image. I don’t want to see you basting a turkey for National Guard troops in California or reading “The Cat in the Hat” to 3-year-olds at a day care in Ohio. You are an Ivy League trained lawyer and social activist. If you want to visit Iowa and brainstorm relief plans for Des Moines, that’s fine; if you want to meet with Chicago leaders about the teenage murder epidemic here, please, we need your help;  but don’t become some ideal of a potential first lady that is as outdated as Dolly Madison. Don’t let what happen to Hillary Clinton during the 1990s happen to you.

With that said, also don’t forget that you are not being elected to the White House, your husband is. Hillary Clinton became unpopular during her husband’s first term because she took on an inappropriate role as first lady. She took on the role of a legislator, and she wasn’t voted into office. The electorate resented her role, and to some degree rightfully so.

I understand that you have to campaign for him, you have to make appearances, but don’t lose yourself in this journey to the presidency. You need to educate the public on who you are and what you are about. Let us know why you love this country, but don’t mask the struggles you’ve encountered in your own childhood as well as the ones you witnessed attempting to tackle issues surrounding poverty on Chicago’s South Side to fit into the mold of Betty Crocker.

We don’t care how your cookies taste. We want you be who you’ve always been: a charismatic, successful professional, wife and mother.  We want you to represent Senator Obama’s views accurately and expansively, and we want you standing next to him when he takes the oath of office in January. 

For the last 72 hours the nation has been mourning Tim
Russert. His sudden death has caused a frenzied examination on his incredible impact
he has made even long before he took over the chair on “Meet the Press.” His
friends have marveled that he was an ordinary guy, the son of a street
sanitation driver who reached the pinnacle of journalistic feats as he
interviewed anyone who was anyone on Sundays at 10 a.m.

While Mr. Russert’s death is a tragedy to his family and
friends, the wider calamity is the vacuous state of political journalism that
Mr. Russert filled to some degree, but has been glaringly evident during the 21^st
century. If this situation is not bettered, we face a far greater threat to our
democracy than Saddam Hussein ever was.

  Why was Mr. Russert
so revered? According to his own words and the reflections of colleagues, he
asked politicians difficult, but fair questions, that served the public’s right
to know. He held the rich and powerful accountable for their decisions and
opinions. His lawyerly training assisted in this endeavor and in effect he was
the people’s prosecutor, convening his grand jury at the start of every week.

 Mr. Russert embodied the ideal role of political journalist.
Unfortunately, he was the lone ranger. I was watching Nancy Grace the other
night and she spent most of her program assessing the Nick Hogan situation
(Hulk Hogan’s son). Hahahahah. I kept watching, waiting for her to switch
topics, this had to be a sick joke of some sort, but no, Nick Hogan and his
phone calls from jail that were released by TMZ was the important subject
matter she addressed.

 
Nancy Grace seems incredibly intelligent. What a waste of a
mind. Indeed it is imperative that journalists not just use their time on
television to discuss the inane. Nor should they be pretty faces or men and
women who can use Smart technology to draw colorful lines on a red and blue
map.  If they do their jobs correctly,
they are essentially the fourth branch of government; the people’s branch of
government. After we elect the president, senators, or representatives, the
public is virtually powerless (sans emails and lobbying that so few people do)
to challenge the power brokers who determine the future of

America

. The
media, along with our government, failed us with the war in

Iraq

. The
coverage was entirely one sided and lacked nuance. Because of this blunder, we
are embroiled in a never ending war that is costing billions of billions of
dollars.

 
These failures are no accident. Despite the vast access to
news thanks to internet, the people reporting the news are decreasing. You may
see thousands of articles written on a particular subject as you search it on
Google, but many of them are by the same authors: Reuters or the Associated
Press. As newspapers have become less profitable, publishers are spending less
on their newsrooms and cutting our representatives, the men and women who cover
the politicians who decide how our environment is mistreated, how our money is
squandered, and how our future is bleak. The same is true for networks that
have to compete with cable news networks. Their solution is to cover light news
(Nick Hogan) rather than delve into difficult issues.

Profits drive news coverage and the people who will suffer
the most are everyday Americans, the men and women whom Tim Russert
represented. So what is the solution? The only thing I can think of is that the

United States

needs a large not for profit news organization, like the BBC, funded by the
public and private donations. Yes, PBS or NPR, but a new entity without the PBS
or NPR liberal baggage. If governmental power goes unchecked by the media, we
will face more futile wars and a visionless

America

.

 Tim Russert will be mourned. It will be discussed how big
his shoes will be to fill. What I want is for there to be many, many, many more
shoes to be filled to protect the American people from unchecked power and from
Nick Hogan.

The world is devolving. And I know why. It’s the Writers’
Strike. People around the world are suffering because they are watching reality
t.v. shows and missing their favorites or the best material from shows that
have returned to the air sans writers.

This has led to insanity not only in this country, but
throughout the world. The writers’ strike began on November 5 and since then
the world has changed drastically:

1. A
        tiger at a zoo in

   California

        jumped over a wall and attacked three young men.

2. Neither
        of last year’s Super Bowl contenders made it past the first play-
3. off
        game. (The Bears didn’t even get to the playoffs).

4. Kenya

   , a
        relatively peaceful country before the Writer’s Strike, is on the brink of
        civil war.

5. Britney
        Spears was carted away by an ambulance after she held one of her son’s
        hostage. Meanwhile her 15-year-old sister, a role model for many children,
        is pregnant.
6. There
        is a threat to remove Scrabulous from Facebook for copyright infringement.
       
7. Singer
        Amy Winehouse dyed her hair blond.
8. Prophets
        have declared an impending doomsday to

   Chicago

   transit riders twice!

9. Vladimir
        Putin is restoring autocracy to

   Russia

   .

10. Parisians
         can no longer smoke in cafes!
11. The
         real Greenlee is back.
12.  Baseball players are being held
         accountable for using steroids.
13. Several
         American Idol stars have lost their recording contracts.

14. Pakistan

    ’s
         opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was assassinated.

15. Toddlers
         and babies can’t have cold or cough medicines.
16. Antidepressants
         don’t cure depression.
17. Moviegoers
         aren’t finding Katherine Heigl terribly annoying.
18. Suri
         Cruise’s biological father is a dead cult leader.
19. 22
         soldiers have died in

    Iraq

         this month and there’s still more month left; the war began almost 5 years
         ago.

20. A man
         who once fried squirrel in his pop corn maker for snack food won the Iowa
         Republican Caucus.
21. Sam Waterston
         was promoted to District Attorney on Law and Order.
22. Economists
         are predicting a terrible, looming recession.
23. After
         7 years of disengagement, President Bush tries to solve the Arab-Israeli
         conflict.
24. Made
         in

    China

         could mean made with lead

25. Dr.
         Phil isn’t a licensed psychologist in

    California

    .

The writers’ strike must end. Their demands must be met. Otherwise,
I fear for the apocalypse where Suri Cruise will rule the world with a resurrected
L. Ron Hubbard by her side.

The following writing could be gender neutral or appositive towards men. However, to write as such would be disingenuous to my current state of emoting feminism. With that said, feel free to apply it to whomever you choose.

This morning at 6:30 a.m. I entered the surgical prep room where my dad was already in bed donning a hospital gown. My brother, a physician, was chatting with friends at the hospital and making my dad feel at ease.

Then she walked in. Dr. Talia Baker. Transplant Surgeon. At age 41 she is one of the top transplant surgeons at

Northwestern

University

Hospital

. She is about 5’6, thin build, blue eyes and dark hair worn in a hybrid layered cut/bob.

Talia has three kids, all under the age of five. She majored in history and then decided to go to medical school. She speaks confidently that “your dad will do just great in the surgery.” I believe her.

Eight and a half hours later she emerges from surgery looking tired but cheerful. She explains with depth and precision why my father’s surgery took so long and complications that she anticipates. I imagine her standing in the surgical room (did I mention it took 8 hours!) cutting my father open, maneuvering through the layers of scar tissue, flipping his liver, and then resecting it and resecting it again until comfortable that the margins are centimeters free of cancer. I imagine her wearing her mini binoculars on her glasses so that she can see precisely the hernias from previous surgeries and the hundred or so bile ducts that have formed as a result of liver damage.

As she anticipates my dad’s recovery, I resist the urge to tackle her with a huge hug of thanks. As soon as I can, I go to the intensive care unit to see my dad. He is doing fine. Many tubes, a mask to help him breathe, but he is just fine. He is even cracking jokes half true to his personality and half fueled by the pain medication and left over anesthetic.

As I return to the surgical waiting room I see the magazines that my sister in law bought to entertain us while we awaited my dad’s emergence from surgery: People and US magazine.

To be fair, I read US Magazine especially if I’m feeling stressed because it helps get my mind off reality. But then I wondered…

How would our world be different if we lauded the Talia Bakers in the world? What if the top selling magazine covers featured women whose contributions mattered, instead of focusing on Britney’s drug problem, Lindsey’s drug problem, Paris’ drug problem, the extra fat on so and sos stomach and the 30 pounds someone was paid to lose by a diet company whose results are unreliable. Why are we focused on who got what plastic surgery and who is dating or cheating on whom?

In addition, why do we fuel the hyper commercialization of young people with marginal talent whose biggest achievement is attaining stardom because of aggressive publicists or being related to famous parents?

Imagine a magazine that features the winner of the Science Olympiad. Or an artist that created art. Or a composer of music. Why are we not featuring these kids successes instead of solely focusing on the rich, famous and f-ed up? What if we knew the stories of the genetic counselors who guide a woman at risk of having a child born with a genetic disease through conception and pregnancy; or the special education teacher who teaches her students to read; or the speech language pathologist who teachers her autistic student to speak; or the volunteer in Africa who counsels victims of rape? Or the attorney at the ACLU who protects a woman’s right to choose? Or the aid who cares for an elderly woman with Alzheimer’s?

Perhaps in this post feminist age, in this uber obsessed celebrity culture, this is the final battle women must fight: the battle to celebrate and promote achievements, even permeate the culture with such accomplishments, which are completely unrelated to looks or sex appeal.

Imagine young women dumping the Hillary Duff and Hannah Montana posters for ones of Condoleeza Rice shaking hands with a Saudi Prince? Or of Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sandra Day O’Connor at the

U.S.

Supreme Court? Or of the top doctor of their town with her arm around a patient she saved after a car accident?

If the day comes when women are revered for what in reality benefits our society rather than the materialism that overwhelms Americans then perhaps this next generation of young women will become “the greatest generation” of the 21^st century. If we continue to revere women only based on their breasts, hair, and waist size, I have no doubt that the future of our country is bleak and Barbie better watch out or her next job will be as a contestant on “The Biggest Loser.”