Women born in the 1950s

2863 quotes found

"Anita Harding's clinical wisdom, enthusiasm, talent for research, and extraordinary personality epitomise all that we value most in a clinical scientist. Anita was an ambassador for British neurology, who patrolled the far corners of a still significant empire which had its roots at Queen Square where she worked and was happy. The evidence for her scientific achievement is in the writings; the style is in our memories. Each will endure. The rise in Anita's career - a readership and honorary consultancy in neurology at the National in 1987, a personal professorship in the University of London in 1990, and chairmanship of neurology at the Institute in 1995 - was meteoric. She served on the editorial boards of eleven journals and eighteen research panels, was a frequent member of the teaching faculty at international meetings, and held visiting professorships in the United Kingdom, Europe, North America and Australia. From amongst the Aladdin's cave of Anita's scientific achievements can be singled out her classifications of the peripheral neuropathies and hereditary ataxias, and genotype-phenotype correlations for each, the first identification of a mitochondrial DNA mutation in human disease, the spectrum of trinucleotide repeats in neurodegeneration, and the population genetics of disorders which show ethnic or geographic restriction. For her manifest achievements, and for our comfort in her absence, I commend Anita Harding to you as the Association's (joint) first medallist for distinguished contributions to neurology."

- Anita Harding

0 likesMedical scientistsWomen born in the 1950s
"The third lesson and tip actually comes from two of my favorite political philosophers - Mao Tse Tung and Mother Teresa, not often coupled with each other, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point, which is, you're going to make choices. You're going to challenge. You're going to say, "Why not?". You're going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before. But here's the deal: These are your choices, they are no one else's. In 1947, when Mao Zedong was being challenged within his own party on his plan to basically take China over. Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side. And people said, "How can you win? How can you do this? How can you do this, against all of the odds against you?" And Mao Zedong said, you know, "You fight your war, and I'll fight mine." And think about that for a second. You don't have to accept the definition of how to do things and you don't have to follow other peoples choices and paths. Ok? It is about your choices and your path. You fight your own war, you lay out your own path, you figure out what's right for you. You don't let external definition define how good you are internally, you fight your war, you let them fight theirs. Everybody has their own path."

- Anita Dunn

0 likesUnited States federal government officialsPolitical commentators from the United StatesWomen from the United StatesPeople from MarylandWomen born in the 1950s
"we wanted to write a scenario that is actually science-based. But picture this...Picture that you live in a city...That you walk out of your house and, actually, the air is fresh and moist. Why? - because humanity has actually done a mega-planting of trees across the entire world. And we have replenished the forest cover that had been lost. And that forest cover is actually helping us to clean the air and to bring temperatures down. We will have regenerated soils. And we will have regenerated the oceans. Now you have oceans that are plentiful. And you have soils that are fertile and producing - on less land, they're producing much more. Imagine that you walk out of your home. And instead of getting into your singly owned, gas-guzzling vehicle, you actually have a smart vehicle that comes around. It picks you up. And of course, it's an electric, clean vehicle. And it takes you to wherever you want to go. No parking. And all of that area that used to be for parking of all of these stupid vehicles is actually now transformed into gardens. Imagine that all of the buildings will have - on the roof, they will either have solar panels for electricity or they will have food gardens. Imagine that every single surface is actually going to be capturing sunlight to produce the energy for that building or it's going to be contributing to cleaning the air and bringing down the temperature."

- Christiana Figueres

0 likesCosta Rican diplomatsWomen born in the 1950sUnited Nations officials
"Only a feminism that fully integrates the expertise of all women, that does not indulge in a hierarchy of liberation agendas, will be capable of bringing large numbers of women together in long-term alliance. Therefore the theory we need to be developing is that which helps us understand the relationships between our different and multifaceted lives, with all their specific struggles and resources. Rather than build unity through simplification, we must learn to embrace multiple rallying points and understand their inherent interdependence. Such a theory needs to shed the metaphor of "intersections" of oppression and assume a much more organic interpenetration of institutional systems of power. The idea of intersection treats the social categories "woman," "working class," "lesbian," "person of color," and so on as if it were possible to separate someone's womanness from her class position, her “racial" or ethnic position, and so on. But these social categories do not exist anywhere in their "pure" state. Every woman is a woman of some class, some ethnicity, some sexual orientation, some country. The notion that working-class, colonized Women of Color suffer from triple jeopardy has always bothered me, because the implication is that racism and class oppression have no effect on those who are privileged by it. There is no such thing as single jeopardy. The only way to believe that the isms are separable is by ignoring privilege-so that upper-class, heterosexual, European and US white women are thought about only in the context of gender, as if people existed only in the categories in which they are oppressed. Social categories don't intersect like separate geometric planes. Each one is wholly dependent on all the others for its existence. For a liberation theory to be useful, it must address the way systems of oppression and privilege saturate each other, are mutually necessary, have no independent existence."

- Aurora Levins Morales

0 likesPoets from Puerto RicoJews from the United StatesFeministsWomen born in the 1950s
"“He told me that you had a loathing of those in the religious life. That was why he found you diligent in his work.” “That was not the reason.” He looks up. “May I speak?” “Oh, for God’s sake,” Henry cries. “I wish someone would.” He is startled. Then he understands. Henry wants a conversation, on any topic. One that’s nothing to do with love, or hunting, or war. Now that Wolsey’s gone, there’s not much scope for it; unless you want to talk to a priest of some stripe. And if you send for a priest, what does it come back to? To love; to Anne; to what you want and can’t have. “If you ask me about the monks, I speak from experience, not prejudice, and though I have no doubt that some foundations are well governed, my experience has been of waste and corruption. May I suggest to Your Majesty that, if you wish to see a parade of the seven deadly sins, you do not organize a masque at court but call without notice at a monastery? I have seen monks who live like great lords, on the offerings of poor people who would rather buy a blessing than buy bread, and that is not Christian conduct. Nor do I take the monasteries to be the repositories of learning some believe they are. Was Grocyn a monk, or Colet, or Linacre, or any of our great scholars? They were university men. The monks take in children and use them as servants, they don’t even teach the dog Latin. I don’t grudge them some bodily comforts. It cannot always be Lent. What I cannot stomach is hypocrisy, fraud, idleness—their worn-out relics, their threadbare worship, and their lack of invention. When did anything good last come from a monastery? They do not invent, they only repeat, and what they repeat is corrupt. For hundreds of years the monks have held the pen, and what they have written is what we take to be our history, but I do not believe it really is. I believe they have suppressed the history they don’t like, and written one that is favorable to Rome.”"

- Hilary Mantel

0 likesNovelists from EnglandWomen authors from EnglandWomen born in the 1950s
"I did not start out in state schools. Like so many children of Labour politicians in the 60s, my brothers and I began our education in the private sector. My parents, Tony and Caroline Benn, decided to move us all to state schools around 1963 on the grounds that it was hypocritical to back comprehensives for everyone else and then educate your own children privately. In some people's eyes, this made us four children a collective sacrifice, a living social experiment. We felt only lucky. Our nearest comprehensive was Holland Park, which cynics so enjoyed deriding as a showcase comprehensive and therefore a place of privilege. (If I had a pound for the number of times people have said to me, "Holland Park? Oh that wasn't a real comprehensive!" I could have paid for a year of private schooling, easy.) Holland Park was one of the first purpose-built comprehensives in the country but it was also, by the time I got there in the late 60s, a large rumbustious institution, which drew in a small, albeit highly publicised, section of the middle class who lived around the school. Some of these, like my mother, Caroline, became passionately committed to both the school itself - she was governor of Holland Park for 35 years - and the wider comprehensive cause. My brother Hilary remembers the strangeness of arriving at Holland Park for the first time after attending Westminster preparatory school, where he and my eldest brother Stephen had been usefully designated as Benn I and Benn II. He can still remember how huge the school buildings looked to him and the strange sound of so many boys - and girls - laughing and running and talking in the vast playgrounds."

- Melissa Benn

0 likesFeminists from EnglandWomen authors from EnglandWomen born in the 1950sWomen journalists from EnglandPeople from London
"A quarter of a century on, the Grunwick dispute remains one of the most significant in modern industrial history. In a sense, the strike was typical of a pattern of similar disputes before and since: a factory with a few hundred workers, a slowly building sense of injustice and a long standoff between employer and worker. But even then, Grunwick seemed a different kind of battle. This was a historic meeting between a traditional trade unionism, still relatively sure of its power, and a growing band of black and Asian workers who were beginning to find an industrial and political voice. Arthur Scargill bought down his Yorkshire miners in a bus - there was even fighting talk of shutting the pits. Grunwick workers travelled to more than 2,000 workplaces over 40 weeks to enlist support. The strike seemed to draw in every progressive movement of the day. "Black and white unite and fight" demanded the banners in Chapter road. Socialist feminists did their picket duty and wrote sternly of the military tactics of their trade union brothers. Jayaben Desai, in her sari and white cardigan, handbag crooked over her arm, was a feminist heroine of the age. Yet perhaps the most lasting consequence of Grunwick and other mass disputes during the 1970s were some of the anti-union laws of the 1980s, particularly those outlawing mass pickets. Today, it is possible to see more clearly the fraud that lay at the heart of the argument advanced by what was then called the "new right", particularly over Grunwick. A few hundred Asian men and women asking for the right to join a union and negotiate from within it was hardly the best example of an overweening and arrogant union movement it claimed was running the country. By any reckoning, Grunwick was a just cause, whose supporters included moderates such as Shirley Williams. In 1977, an independent court of inquiry chaired by Lord Scarman criticised mass picketing but upheld the workers' claim to union recognition. But it was a lost cause: George Ward, the Grunwick owner, refused to give in. This, despite a last-ditch hunger strike by Mrs Desai and four colleagues on the steps of the TUC. The strike fizzled out in early 1978. No walkout since, bar the miners' strike of 1984-5, has quite achieved Grunwick's fame or progressive significance. In the early 1980s, I went to a small factory near Birmingham to cover a similar dispute, led by a group of Asian workers protesting about pay and conditions and the right to union recognition. This time, the streets were empty. As union power declined, so did media coverage - if there's no punch-up, so what?"

- Melissa Benn

0 likesFeminists from EnglandWomen authors from EnglandWomen born in the 1950sWomen journalists from EnglandPeople from London
"When in the fall of 2004 Chief Justice William Rehnquist fell ill with thyroid cancer, his condition set off months of conjecture over his potential replacement. Antonin Scalia's name was at the center of the speculation. On the Supreme Court for almost eighteen years, Scalia had become the intellectual leader of legal conservatives. Law students and professors- the like-minded but even many who disagreed with him- devoured his legal opinions. Of the nine sitting justices, he was most often the subject of academic law review articles. He had a celebrity quality that drew standing-room-only crowds to his appearances on college campuses. And he was held up as a model justice by President George W. Bush, who would be the one deciding on a new chief justice if Rehnquist retired. Yet Scalia was also the Court's contrarian. The speculation on Rehnquist's replacement turned on the question: Could a justice whose views of the Constitution harked back two centuries, and who routinely lost the votes of his colleagues become chief justice of the United States? Within the decorous chambers, Scalia was notorious for pushing away other justices at critical points in the decision-making process. In a close case, when he was barely holding on to a majority, he could not resist brash comments that might alienate a key vote. When he was in dissent, he did not go quietly. On critical points of law he declared that his colleagues' opinions "cannot be taken seriously"; were "beyond the absurd"; and should be considered "nothing short of preposterous." In June 2004, a few months before Rehnquist revealed the cancer, the Court ruled that the execution of mentally retarded convicts violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Scalia, in dissent, blasted the majority: "Seldom has an opinion of this Court rested so obviously upon nothing but the personal views of its members.""

- Joan Biskupic

0 likesWomen journalists from the United StatesLawyers from the United StatesWomen authors from the United StatesWomen in lawWomen born in the 1950s
"Looking from the astrobiology perspectives, life on Earth started early—just about as soon as it could. The more we learn about the origin of life, the more we realize it may be a likely outcome any time you have the right ingredients. However, if you look at the history of life on Earth, let’s say you put it on a twelve-hour clock, up until four o’clock it was just a world of microorganisms, from four to five o’clock that’s the era of plants coming onto land and animals and creatures in the sea, then after five o’clock until about ten o’clock this will be a world of only microorganisms again. So, in fact, our planet is in its late middle ages in terms of life on the surface. Then from ten o’clock until about midnight, the world will be completely desolate, devoid of life as the sun is running out of its nuclear fuel in the center and its outer atmosphere is expanding. The point is that our world has had big life for only a small slice of its existence and the portion of that which has had technology is even smaller. I think life is presumably abundant everywhere; the most common form is likely going to be microbial life. In addition, the distances are so vast that unless other civilizations have developed both a means of crossing those distances quickly and the desire to do so, plus the energy capability, I don’t know if we’ll see alien intelligence in our lifetime."

- Unknown

0 likesAstronomers from the United StatesWomen scientists from the United StatesMassachusetts Institute of Technology alumniWomen academics from the United StatesWomen born in the 1950s
"I know you think you are poor. You have to wear second hand clothes and often walked barefoot to school in winter when you were young. The other learners laugh at you since you are not as well off as they are. But you get the top marks in mathematics and science. You see, being poor in material things does not make your brain also poor. What matters is that you are focused, disciplined and respectful. * Remember you grew up herding sheep and had to fend for yourself from the boys in the fields? That you had to go to school on alternate days and you had to do many other jobs which boys had to do such as working in the construction company, which involved mixing cement, laying bricks, etc? All this hard work was good for you. It gave you discipline and taught you never to shy away from hard work. It gave you the strong belief in yourself and capabilities. And you you learned all you had to do while maintaining your pride and dignity. What about your family? Will they understand why you need to go to University? Let me tell you, they will not. They would like you to work and support your brother and sister so they can complete their schooling. Also Tebello, remember that even though you are good in mathematics and general science, you decided not to do these two subjects when you entered high school? Do you know why? Let me tell you. You listened to your peers. Be wary of peers. You have always been an independent thinker. You never went along with the crowd. Why start now? Eventually, with two years of high school left, you realize that arts is not for you. So you are now doing Physics, Biology and Chemistry and an advanced mathematics course. You are worried that you cannot do all the courses in two years. But you will, since you are excited about being a scientist. Do you doubt you can make it? Do you think you have what it takes to be a scientist? Let me tell you this: you do have what it takes. You like nature, this may have come from your shepherd days. You like to ask deep questions about your environment and you like to fix things around the house. You like to see plants grow, you love to listen to birds and identify them. You do not realize that this is what science is about. Being a scientist means being in touch with your environment, having an inquisitive mind and asking questions about how things work. You like challenges, you like to do the impossible. All the hard work you did when you were younger was preparing you for the discipline needed for doing in TWO years what others did in THREE years. Yes, you will have to work very hard to catch up with the others, but then I know you would never shy away. You will thinking of going to University, later. Your peers will be there again, telling you that you will never get married if you are too educated. They will say men do not like educated women. Are you going to listen to them again after your experience in high school? I know you, you learn your lessons very quickly. You will ignore peers this time. In fact you will encourage some of your peers to go to University with you. What about your family? Will they understand why you need to go to University? Let me tell you, they will not. They would like you to work and support your brother and sister so they can complete their schooling. You know this is fair since you were supported. The family believes you have enough education. All they wanted was for you to be more educated than they were. Now you are going too far, they are now worried about when you will get married and have children. So what are you going to do? You cannot disrespect your family. But I know you, you will find a way out. You want to remain challenged by science. So you will decide to work for a year to support your family and to see your younger sister complete her high school. And you will be even more determined to go to University. The reason is you will not enjoy your job. It will not be challenging enough for you! You believe education will equip you to have a more fulfilling career. But you have been told endlessly that women do not need a career, they just have to marry well. But you are different. You have an independent mind. You believe you can be a wife and a mother and still be a bread winner and contribute to society. And you will."

- Tebello Nyokong

0 likesWomen born in the 1950sWomen scientists from South AfricaWomen academics from South Africa
"Sadly for all of us, our culture does little to encourage boys to become great men. Television depicts men as stupid, or as sex addicts, and almost always intellectually and emotionally shallow. Men don't seem to care about these depictions, merely laughing them off. But I care about them, because our sons need good role models and given the amount of time boys spend with electronic media they need good role models on television. And of course, there is a bigger cultural fallout from the depreciation of masculinity and fatherhood, which is lower marriage rates, higher divorce rates, and the reality that many boys grow up in fatherless homes.This is a national tragedy, because boys need healthy encouragement from their fathers more than they need it from anyone else. In a boy's eyes, his father's words are sacred. They hold enormous power. His words can crush a boy or piece him back together after a fall. If a father is not there at all, there is a huge void in a boy's life — and as the depressing statistics remind us, boys who grow up without fathers are at a dramatically greater risk of drug abuse, alcohol abuse, sexually transmitted diseases, and ending up in prison.Encouragement from a father changes a boy's life. His words can ignite furious passion in a boy that will help him achieve any goal he sets out to accomplish. To a son, a dad's words are the final truth. If they are positive, a boy feels that he cannot be beaten; if they are negative, however, a son feels that he could never win. If you are a son reading this, you know exactly what I mean."

- Meg Meeker

0 likesWomen physicians from the United StatesPediatriciansWomen authors from the United StatesNon-fiction authors from the United StatesWomen born in the 1950s
"At the top of most lists of good behavior is honesty. Boys are keenly attuned to honesty in those around them. And they feel it immediately when people around them sway from it. If a boy has a strong conscience, his eyebrows, nostrils, hairline, and mouth will all betray him if he tries to lie, because he will know he is breaking the code of conduct. Boys consider honesty a masculine quality, so to betray it is to be less of a man. Heroes, in a boy's eyes, are deserving of honor because they stand for what is right and just, and what is right and just is honesty.Living honestly feels better to boys than living with deception, even if that deception is meant to get them what they want. Boys like feeling strong and courageous, and telling the truth demands strength and honesty. Lying feels grungy. Lying makes boys fearful because they know it is a weakness. The liar is someone who is afraid of the truth.This is why boys are so open to being trained to tell the truth. They know that if you teach them to be truth tellers, you're teaching them to be strong. They know good boys, internally strong boys, tell the truth; wishy-washy boys lie. No one needs to tell them this; they know it. So in teaching honesty you have a ready audience. Don't blow it by encouraging your son to tell white lies — even if they're well intentioned. Young boys think in black-and-white terms. A statement is either true or it is false. The younger the boy, the less gray he feels in his thinking. When a parent coaxes him to tell "white lies" he is confused. The term is an oxymoron. In order to accommodate his parents' wishes, he puts lies into the pool of acceptable speech. Beginning such ambiguous training so early on in life leads boys down a slippery path."