Trump: A True Challenge for Women

by Williamb on January 31, 2017 - 2:27pm

In the article, “Trump’s order on abortion policy: What does it mean?”, the BBC advocate that trump’s policy to ban the use of federal money going to international groups, who provide help or inform people regarding abortion is not necessarily a bad thing for American citizens. The new policy simply implies that a fraction of Americans income taxes will no longer be used to support those international groups; the policy does not affect services provided for abortion at home (BBC para. 8). Although, many argue that Trump’s policy does not entirely represent the true value of a democratic system; thus, the ban on federal money was sign primarily by a cabinet entirely composed of white men (BBC para. 3). Should men, even be allowed to make decisions regarding a woman’s body is a question asked by many. This question will be elaborated further in the following paragraph (BBC para. 8).

In the United-States, most decisions undertaken by officials in the past were made by men; this is often the case for most governments (BBC para. 24). For example, the 1973 Roe V. Wade law who prohibited abortion in the United-States “was delivered by an all-male Supreme Court” (BBC para. 25). But should laws who primarily affect women’s health care still be undertaken by men? This is debatable. After all, according to a recent census of the American population, women represent 50.9% of the whole population (Demographic Statistics: United States). Therefore, it seems just right that women should also be equally represented in a political party; to prevent policies that might affect them. This seems to be the recent option adopted by the prime minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau, who has decided to opt for a cabinet of 31 members; 15 of those members are women (CBC News para. 1). In Trump’s case, his cabinet should also be representative of the population and not only for white males. After all, the white house is supposed to represent a symbol of freedom and growing America (Leinbach Marquis 1).

Trump’s political party does not seem to be the best suited to address social issues who affect women; indeed, members in trump’s party are mostly white males. Trump needs to appoint more women in his party to have a better understanding of social issues from both angles. Without a fair proportion of women in his party trump is not qualified to sign an executive order that endangers millions of women around the world (BBC para 2). Laws should not be changed before a general consensus has been established between the political party in place and the people affected by the problem itself; in this case women.

Full List of Justin Trudeau’s Cabinet. CBC News, 5 Nov. 2016,

Infoplease. Demographics Statistics: United-States 2000. U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. Webpage,

Marquis, Amy Leinbach. "An American Home." National Parks, vol. 83, no. 1, 2009, pp. 1-3. Academic Search Elite, url=


This is a very informative and interesting article. To further its analysis, you could have included a feminist viewpoint as to why the Supreme Court is composed of primarily white-male Americans. America was built by a patriarchal world view which abides by the rules of hegemonic masculinity. This means that the American society believes that white, virile men should be in control of political, social, economic, religious, and familial power while women should accept their subordinate roles. Even though this belief is outdated, our society is still effected by this traditional notion as shown by the underrepresentation of women in the Supreme Court. Only 3 members of the Supreme Court are women and they had to go through multiple obstacles their male counterparts did not have to go through in order to attain their approval to be on this Court. This gender discrimination manifest itself in the glass ceiling theory. The glass ceiling is when women are prevented from obtaining high-ranking job positions despite being just as or more qualified for the job as male candidates due to this sexist, cultural belief. I believe more women should be appointed seats in the Supreme Court because they provide a different perspective on new policies and world issues. Their viewpoints are especially important when the Supreme Court makes decisions about bills that effect women like policies on abortion. They provide an insightful understanding about what women experience and what their needs are better than male members of the Court.

Another aspect of your article that could have be elaborated on is intersectionality. Intersectionality describes the discriminatory systems (sexism, racism, classism, etc.) that overlaps & reinforces each other in our society which prevents minorities from gaining political, social or economic power. These minority groups are also effected by the glass ceiling. By looking at the current ethnicities of the members of the Supreme Court, we can clearly see that the privileged white male and white female individuals dominate the demographic of the Supreme Court. Note that there are more men than women and that there is only 1 Black male on this court. This an unjust because a person’s ethnicity or gender does not affect their ability to make rational decisions in politics, whereas narrow-mindedness does. In order to create a more forward-thinking and fair society, the Supreme Court should appoint more women and people of different ethnicity who are just as qualified for the job as white men. Overall your article was enjoyable. Keep up the good work!

Discrimination of gender experienced by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Supreme Court member.
Members of the current Supreme Court.

A very well written and informative post on the ongoing social issues that women face in the work force and in society. With President Trump as leader of the so called “free world” these injustices that women face are not going to disappear anytime soon. Your article’s message is very clear but there is another underlying message when reading it. The article speaks about how policies concerning women’s bodies and health are being created and passed by men. The reason being that women have a minority presence in President Trump’s cabinet and in the political sphere of the United States of America.

From a gender perspective: the underlying message of your article is the glass ceiling that women and minorities face in the corporate and political world of the 21st century. The glass ceiling is the invisible barrier that prevents women and visible minorities to climb to the highest levels of the corporate or political ladder. Despite their qualifications and their education women and visible minorities seem to advance up the ladder as quickly as white men. At entry-level or other low-level positions the job market is filled equally with both men and women but less and less women (including visible minorities) are found in high-level, high-paying positions. The Patriarchal society favours men; significantly men that are white and virile. For women to achieve the same status as a man they must jump though more hoops and overcome more obstacles; all because they are not a man. Trump’s administration and the current members of the Supreme Court (3 women to 8 men) are evidence to the ongoing struggles that women face. In the presidential race, Hillary Clinton has reached record places but still has not reached the highest glass ceiling. She is the testament that women can break through some of the highest ceilings there are. To further your understanding of the glass-ceiling topic, refer to the links posted below about Hillary Clinton.

DNC speech:
Defeat Speech: ( She speaks about the glass ceiling that women face in the world although they did not break the highest one)

Members of the supreme court

About the author

"Running taught me valuable lessons. In cross-country competition, training counted more than intrinsic ability, and I could compensate for a lack of natural aptitude with diligence and discipline. I applied this in everything I did"
- Nelson Mandela