Thanks for the update, Judy. As a 70s feminist, I have to agree that it's time for the younger generation to lead the way, as long as their candidate is qualified to lead NOW to relevance.

The most interesting question for me is whether Jessica Valenti realizes how quickly feminists like Latifa Lyles could supplant her perceptions of what Feminism means in a multi-racial, multi economic income environment. Perhaps, certain unquestioned feminist conceits will reveal themselves as the remaining bastions of a classist (and somewhat Eurocentric) movement and jettisoned in favor of a reconsideration of the economic and societal needs of the working poor/middle class. (Frankly, I would love to live in a world where any leading feminist would be embarrassed to publicly make a comment about "most women idolizing Angelina Jolie" in an environment where working class women are struggling to survive.) If Ms. Lyles does win the presidency of NOW, it will be interesting for many to discover that our differences as Third Wavers of multi-racial/multi economic origin could highlight more ideological differences between us than we ever had against the Second Wavers in the first place.

NOW had eight good years with Gandy, do we really need another eight years of a white, 55+, woman with short brown hair? They are almost indistinguishable. NOW really needs a make over, this looks like the chance to freshen it up!

But what about actual experience? I'm the last one to say that someone can't take the reigns and do an amazing job without tons of experience (I like the quotation 'everyone wants an expert, sometimes they're lucky enough to get a frosh'). But this is a giant organization with an important presence- I wonder if she knows how to handle that type of leadership experience? I'm not doubting, I'd just be interested to read about that aspect. Leading is about more than the great ideas, and I think her ideas need some swift implementation!

The site clearly hasn't been overhauled in years. Not only do they not have a blog, but the language they use is out-of-date and kind of not that accurate.

For instance: the six issues on their "issues" sidebar include "Lesbian Rights." I know barely anyone under 35 who self-identifies that way -- and no one at all under 35 who thinks of it in terms of "lesbian rights" and not "LGBT rights" or "queer rights" or whatever. "Lesbian rights" was a 60/70s thing - it's a phrase that speaks of separate gay and lesbian communities (pre-AIDS) and lesbian separatism -- not how things currently are, where the "lesbian" community has a lot of bi women and trans folks.

Example Two: I clicked through to "Women in the Military." Their first item is "A National Disgrace: Stop Sexual Assault in the Military." Great, except 1) the blurb under it is sketchy and questionable ("It is estimated that rates of marital abuse in the military are two to five times higher than civilian rates of domestic violence. Moreover, one in three women in the military will be sexually assaulted during their tour of duty.") There's no citation and they're cherry-picking numbers. 2) Their "take action" thing involves writing your representative about a bill (H.R.840) for which there's been no action since February. Nothing is happening on this bill. The update went up in April - and, obv., it's currently June. This is the best they can do in terms of current, useful, relevant content? Functioning activist groups only do action items on bills that are actually currently relevant.

Anyway. Not a functional, relevant organization. They should probably fix that. The idea that a young, black woman will necessarily be better for that than an older white women? Meh. There are a lot of older white woman who are smart and competent as hell and well aware of these new things called blogs. Many companies seem to go from old white guy to old white guy and no one says "they look so much alike - they even have the same hair!"

From the article, which also doesn't describe Lyle's professional experiences while focusing solely on her race and youth:

Frustratingly, while the AP article describes O'Neill's platform -- and specifically her emphasis on grassroots activism and direct action -- it barely touches on the changes Lyles promises to make, choosing instead to obsess over her identity as a young, black woman.

Lyle has held the position of Vice President for Membership for nearly as long as Ms. O'Neill. For some ungodly reason, the individuals who usually proclaim themselves "colorblind" usually are the first to clamor about the racial background of a worthy candidate as if that single characteristic trumps all other qualifications.

From Lyle's candidacy website at NOWisthetime09.com:

For the past three and half years, Latifa has served as NOW's Vice President for Membership, starting her term in 2005 as the youngest-ever National officer. She oversees the organization's Direct Marketing and Membership programs, including NOW's online and web fundraising program. In addition to development and fundraising, Latifa is a chief spokesperson for the organization on issues ranging from sexual violence on campus to women in the media to Title IX. She has appeared on The Today Show, CNN, MSNBC, PBS's To the Contrary, local radio and news and numerous print media. Also, she serves as Treasurer of the NOW Political Action Committee (NOW PAC). Prior to her current position, she managed the membership fundraising program for Public Justice, America's public interest law firm. Before joining Public Justice, she worked on the NOW staff as the Development Planner on the fundraising for four years. Before turning to fundraising, she worked at the Older Women's League doing policy analysis on issues affecting mid-life and older women, including pension reform and Social Security.

Latifa attended her first march on Washington in 1992, joining the half-million men and women in the March for Women's Lives in support of reproductive justice. Since 1999, she has been a NOW member and leader, serving in various leadership roles in the organization from the chapter level to the national board. Prior to her election as a National Vice President, she served in other key roles in NOW, including Board Liaison to the first National Young Feminist Task Force and member of the national 2005 Women of Color and Allies Summit organizing committee.

From O'Neill's website at http://feministleadershipnow.wordpress.com/terry-oneill-for-now-president/:

Terry O’Neill is an innovative, strategic leader for social justice and change. She has a successful track record in the executive management of women’s organizations, including financial management, fundraising and advocacy. She currently serves as Chief of Staff to a Montgomery County (MD) Councilmember whose successes include passage of a transgender equality law and the establishment of Maryland’s first Family Justice Center for survivors of domestic violence. Previously, Terry served as Executive Director of the National Council of Women’s Organizations (2005-2007) and as NOW’s Vice President – Membership (2001-2005). As Membership Vice President, she directed NOW’s direct marketing program, successfully strengthening membership recruitment despite the financial setbacks brought about by 9/11.

Terry’s feminist activism began with fighting right-wing extremists like David Duke in the Deep South. She has served as president of Louisiana NOW and New Orleans NOW, and a member of the National Racial Diversity Committee. She is a past president of Maryland NOW and currently serves on the NOW National Board from the Mid-Atlantic region.

A successful attorney and law professor, Terry has taught at Tulane in New Orleans and the University of California at Davis, where her courses included feminist legal theory and international women’s rights law in addition to corporate law and legal ethics. She has testified before committees in the Maryland House of Delegates and written key federal amicus briefs on abortion rights for Louisiana NOW, Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Both candidates seem worthy to me, but in terms of professional experience, Ms. O'Neill seems more worthy. I learned a long time ago that some Second Wavers understand pertinent gender based problems far better than most Third Wavers ever could because most ThirdWavers are still wet behind the ears, excessively narrow-minded and hamstrung by their social and economic insularity. There is something to be said for experience. If we must vote for Lyles, let it be on her own merits, not as some empty "colorblind" gesture.