The Justice Department announced Thursday that it would not interfere with state laws legalizing recreational marijuana.
Colorado and Washington legalized recreational marijuana use in November 2012. The Justice Department could have sued the two states to prevent the laws from taking effect, because marijuana is still illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act of 1970. Instead, the Obama administration decided to give them room to experiment with recreational use legislation, within limits. Colorado and Washington will still be required to have regulatory systems in place to enforce eight areas, including distribution to minors, driving under the influence, trafficking by gangs.
Clear Channel lifted its ban on radio advertisements from the Wichita reproductive health clinic South Wind Women’s Center on Tuesday. The ads were originally banned in July for divisive content, although they promoted general reproductive health care services for women with no mention of abortion.
South Wind Women’s Center provides a range of reproductive health care services, and it is the only clinic that provides abortions in Wichita. It is located in the same building Dr. George Tiller used before he was assassinated by an anti-abortion activist in 2009.
The decision to lift the ban comes after supporters of the clinic planned to deliver a petition today with over 68,000 signatures asking the radio station to reconsider its ban. However, the company said the petition did not affect its decision. Clear Channel operations manager in Wichita, Tony Matteo, said, “As a responsible broadcaster we should use our best judgment to accept and run ads that do not violate the law or FCC standards and which are not intentionally hateful or incendiary.”
Wal-Mart recently announced that the company will provide health insurance for their employees’ domestic partners including LGBT partners as part of an updated benefits package that also includes vision insurance, coverage for some surgeries, and incentives to quit smoking. Walmart is the nation’s largest private employer with a staff of 1.3 million people, more than half of whom rely on Wal-Mart’s health care plans.
The benefits will apply to unmarried partners living together in an ongoing committed relationship, who have been together for at least 12 months, and who plan to continue living together indefinitely. Whether they are a same sex or opposite sex couple does not matter. The benefits will take effect in all 50 states, regardless of each state’s definitions of marriage, domestic partnership, or civil union.
Thousands of fast food and retail workers across the US plan to go on strike this Thursday, protesting the current hourly wage. The strikes by fast food and retail workers have been building over thepast few months, originating with New York restaurant workers in November of 2012.
The workers planning to strike this week, in up to 35 cities or more, will demand a 15 dollar hourly wage, a large increase from the current hourly average of nine dollars and yearly average of $18,130. The typical worker has no benefits and an irregular schedule. The strikers are partnering with grassroots organizations and advocacy groups like Service Employees International Union.
Restaurant industry advocates are criticizing the action. “Restaurants already operate on very thin profit margins,” National Restaurant Association spokeswoman Cristin Fernandez said in a statement. “Significant additional labor costs can negatively impact a restaurant’s ability to hire or maintain jobs.”
Although strikers have not yet achieved their goals of raising wages and allowing them to unionize–important in cases where workers can be fired for participating in strikes–the strikes have helped raise awareness about the fact that many fast food workers are not parent-supported teenagers just making extra cash, but people who must survive on these dismal wages.
This is the largest labor movement in fast food industry history, and it shows no signs of stopping. “It’s not going to happen tomorrow, but we’re going to make sure it happens somehow. They need to hear our voice. They need to hear about our struggles,” Jossura Dossantos, a KFC employee, told the Boston Globe.
Researchers in the US have discovered a potential new way to detect ovarian cancer. Currently, tumors are difficult to detect in the early stages of ovarian cancer, and there is no effective mass screening program.
The study, which was published on August 26 in the journal Cancer, followed 4,051 post-menopausal women for an 11-year period. Scientists have long known that levels of the protein CA125 are higher in the blood of women with ovarian cancer, so the women’s CA125 levels were tracked through yearly blood tests. The participants were sorted into low-, medium-, or high-risk of cancer groups based on their protein levels, and women who had high levels were referred to a gynecologist for an ultrasound. Several women were then treated for early stage cancer.
Symptoms of ovarian cancer, such as bloating and abdominal or pelvic pain, are often dismissed, so women may ignore them until they are already in the late stages. “Early detection of ovarian cancer will be the key to transforming survival rates. However, this study is very small, and there is no guarantee that the results will be replicated on a larger scale,” Annwen Jones, the chief executive at Target Ovarian Cancer, said in a statement.
Trials of 50,000 women are ongoing in the UK and expected to be completed by 2015. If the UK trials confirm the findings from the present study, tracking CA125 levels could become routine practice.
I get a choice when it comes to birth control: pills, rings, shots. I get a choice when it comes to condoms: ultra thin, “her pleasure,” ribbed, studded – it goes on. There’s choices everywhere; unfortunately, there is also a small margin of error when it comes to their effectiveness.
There are myriad reasons why a woman has the right to choose which I couldn’t possibly begin to list here. Point is, it’s her choice.
I know several women who have had abortions. I know they are glad they had the ability to make that choice for their own respective reasons. And although we may not always understand, although we may not always agree, remember: it’s her choice.
A U.S. Marine tricked me into getting pregnant. I was in my 20s, divorced with two toddlers and running my own business. I lived in a military town at the time and had met “Joe” through a friend whose husband was in the Navy.
We dated casually; I had no desire for a serious relationship, having married at 18 only to realize, two years and two babies later, that I’d signed on to a kind of life that bore little resemblance to the life that began taking shape in my head as I got to know myself better. I’d carved out a little niche in the workworld and was slowly growing my own modest business, arranging my schedule so that I could spend as much time as possible with my two young children. Still, I was in my 20s, and sometimes girls really DO just wanna have fun, so occasionally I’d go on a “girls night out” or agree to be set up for a casual date, strictly to break up the routine, not with any eye toward a serious relationship. So it was that Joe and I began dating.
We’d seen each other maybe three times when Joe first told me he could easily imagine us married. “Really?” I said. “I’m not sure I ever want to get married again.” He seemed surprised by my reply; something in his demeanor suggested that he thought I didn’t mean it, that I might be playing hard to get. I wasn’t. From time to time he’d bring it up again. Every time I’d express flat disinterest in marriage.
There came a day when we were going to have sex and Joe said he had no condom. I’d insisted he use one every time we had sex, even though I used a birth control Sponge. He said again what he’d said the first time we had sex and I insisted on the condom: no need to worry because he’d had a vasectomy. I repeated what I’d told him that first time: it wasn’t only pregnancy we should both protect ourselves against. Maybe it was his promise to dig out his military medical records and show me – “Tomorrow! First thing!” – proof of the vasectomy and that his sexual health was “clean as a whistle,” but for whatever reason, this time I was persuaded, and we had sex without using a condom.
The next time we got together, same thing happened – except this time, the next day I followed through and asked to see his medical records. Joe seemed surprised and began trying to change the subject. “The woman I’m going to marry doesn’t trust me!” he joked, completely ignoring the fact that by then I’d told him many times I did not want to get married, possibly ever. This in itself was a red flag to me and probably was partly why I wouldn’t be brushed off this time. I pressed the point: Show me your medical records. Finally he said he’d have to retrieve them from somewhere – his sister’s house maybe, or a storage unit. He was about to leave for a month-long military exercise but swore he’d bring me the records next time we saw each other.
In the interim between that conversation and his return, I discovered I was pregnant. Joe had been my only sex partner since I’d been divorced so there was no question as to paternity. I was furious. At myself for having been gullible and, I scolded myself at the time, weak. At him for having lied to me. I hadn’t confirmed this yet but had a sick feeling it was just a matter of time.
From the moment I saw the drugstore home-pregnancy test change color, there was zero question in my mind about how I would proceed. I did not want to be pregnant and definitely did not want a child. I felt no ambiguity or uncertainty about this, no musing about “what if we did get married” because being married was the last thing I wanted. I also didn’t feel panicked or conflicted. What I felt was determined.
Through a free local paper I found a clinic that performed abortions and made an appointment after phoning and answering a few screening questions. When Joe called me upon his return, I asked him to come by – and to bring his medical records with him. Sure, he said. No problem.
When he arrived, he didn’t have the records and launch into a convoluted excuse. As he talked I walked into the bathroom, retrieved the pregnancy test-stick, and brought it to him. He stopped talking. Then asked, “What’s this?” I told him I was pregnant.
This is the part where any guy who’s had a vasectomy ought to respond with demands for a paternity test, right? After all, couldn’t possibly be his. There was no such demand, of course. Instead, he just sort of sighed and said something like, “Okay, okay, I lied. I never had a vasectomy. I figured if you got pregnant we’d just get married.” Again with the “married” thing.
Needless to say, we did not marry. I told him that I’d already made an appointment for an abortion and that if he wanted to drive me or at least pick me up that would be great but that I was going either way. He didn’t protest, didn’t ask me to think about it. He drove me. The procedure itself went smoothly, no complications (unless we count the protestors lining the driveway). Joe and I never saw each other again.
That was more than 20 years ago. As it was, I went on to later marry a wonderful (honest) man, with whom I had two incredible children who are my very life. From that day at the clinic right up to today, I’ve never once regretted having an abortion. But I have shuddered many times to think: What if it hadn’t been an option?
Thank you, Roe v. Wade. Please don’t ever change.
L. Anderson is a writer whose erstwhile incarnations include medical language specialist, paralegal, and editor of a pioneering online arts/culture/politics magazine. She is a lifelong feminist and the proud mother of four remarkable children.
I grew up knowing I could ask my mom anything. I remember once asking her how women know where to go if they need to have an abortion.
She told me that they could call the National Organization for Women and ask them to refer her to an abortion provider. I filed the information away, perhaps marking the completion of my first research project as a future reproductive justice activist.
It was not until much later in life that I learned why my mom had provided me with such a specific answer. When she became unexpectedly pregnant as a young nanny prior to Roe v. Wade, she called the National Organization for Women in search of a safe abortion.
Unofficial information networks that connected women to abortion providers were not uncommon.
After all, the fact that abortion was illegal didn’t deter women from seeking the reproductive healthcare they needed. Making abortion illegal didn’t remove women’s need for full reproductive healthcare, including ending a pregnancy.
While my mom was fortunate to know where to turn to get the information necessary to locate an abortion provider and had the ability to pay for the healthcare she needed, many women did not enjoy an equal privilege.
A study of low-income women in New York City in the 1960s found that almost 1 in 10 had ever attempted to terminate a pregnancy by illegal abortion and 8 in 10 of those women said they had attempted a self-induced procedure. Only 2% reported a physician being involved in any way.
Self-induced or “underground” abortions, the only option for many women, resulted in hardship, injury and even death—our country’s memory of times before Roe v. Wade. I wish I could say that the abortion access problem of my mother’s time is just a painful memory of the past for American women and their families.
The truth is that although abortion is now legal, meaningful access is still not a reality for many women simply looking to make the best decision for their unique life circumstances.
Since the Hyde Amendment was passed in 1976, women who are eligible for government-funded health care coverage have been denied coverage of abortion, making the care difficult to afford. This harmful policy has resulted in too many women having to make a choice between foregoing rent, paying their bills, or paying for their abortion care.
The Hyde Amendment intentionally targets poor women, who studies show are disproportionately women of color. A woman’s income shouldn’t be a roadblock to receiving the care she needs in a timely manner from a licensed provider.
Meaningful access to abortion includes affordability, health care coverage, and physical access or proximity to a provider.
More state-level abortion restrictions were enacted in 2011 than ever before and last year brought the second-highest number of abortion restrictions ever. These restrictions harm women in the midst of a difficult decision by requiring unnecessary and invasive barriers to care—things like mandatory counseling, waiting periods, and mandatory ultrasounds—all of which work to dissuade a woman from making a decision she believes is best for her life. These restrictions also make obtaining an abortion more expensive since she may have to travel hours to a provider, take time off from work, and find childcare for her kids.
Meaningful and real access to abortion will only come full circle when every woman has insurance coverage for abortion care if she needs it and can make decisions about her reproductive health, free from political interference.
As we commemorate the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, it is crucial we recognize and address the barriers that so many women continue to face all these years later.
The fight for women’s full reproductive freedom has not yet been won.
There are so many women in my neighborhood and my community that still face the same barriers in accessing an abortion that women of my mother’s generation faced when they sought an abortion more than forty years ago.
This is unconscionable.
We need to make sure that women can get the care they need. This means lifting the restrictions on insurance coverage of abortion.
Sara Alcid is a Contributing Writer for Everyday Feminism and is a young feminist living and working in Washington, DC as a reproductive health and justice advocate. Sara loves thinking, reading and writing about the socially and personally transformative power of feminism, queer issues, and women’s health. Follow her on Twitter @SaraAlcid.
My mother wanted to be an astronaut. She admitted to me once that although she did not believe in God, she knew for a fact aliens existed. As a child she would walk among the cotton rows, praying up to the Carolina sky a spaceship might come to take her away.
In Mama’s young life, humans had been a huge disappointment. Born to a barely 15-year-old girl, my mama was the second of seven. Her vivacious mother, uneducated and lacking reproductive self-determination had more babies than she was able to feed. Mama’s controlling daddy believed that the only way to hold on to his young, ambitious wife was to keep her perpetually with child. His plan worked for nearly ten years. Then one Sunday after church, when my grandmother was 23 years old she rustled her little children to the front porch of a sharecroppers rental and announced she was “leaving to become a bluegrass singer and wouldn’t be coming back.” She stained each one of their cheeks with scarlet red lipstick and kept her promise.
Left with the children and not the woman, Mama’s Daddy proved to be an abusive man, unworthy of the love those tiny abandoned babies tried so desperately to earn from him. Mama’s childhood was beset with the kind of Southern pride that holds off charity and allows poverty to starve opportunity.
When she turned 18, she left our small east coast town to go “be somebody” in California. She was back in 4 months. Too naive to know that dreams can only find strength from a reservoir of love. Soon she was pregnant and although she wasn’t ready for me, abortion was illegal. Daddy jokes me that “I am lucky to be alive” and I am glad she did not take the back alley to an abortion but not to save my life, to save hers.
Until the day my Mama died, Daddy and I did our best to give her the love she’d been denied but we were powerless to stop her life’s dreams from succumbing to the wounds of a forsaken child. I do not thank my Mama for not aborting me anymore than I blame her for the miscarriage she had when I was in the 2nd grade. Another healthy baby girl joined our family years after and she has our Mama’s eyes.
I am now a mother too and with safe and legal family planning I have been able to alter my family’s legacy. I use my reproductive freedom the way I imagine my Grandmother and my Mama would want me, giving my daughters the love they deserve to reach for the stars.
Leigh Sanders is a North Carolina born and bred women’s rights activist. A writer/educator/community volunteer. She also mothers two marvelously liberated daughters. She recently started blogging at free2bleigh.com.
When we talk about the restriction and regulation of abortion access, we often talk (and rightly so) about how what we are really discussing is the restriction of abortion access for people with the least economic and social privilege in society—people without the time, finances, support, or connections to travel somewhere that they can access a safe abortion or to have one safely but illegally performed near their home, with little expectation of punishment.
However, there’s another group of individuals who rely on publicly funded insurance and medical facilities and who, as a result, are sometimes not able to access abortion care when they need it, regardless of their ability to pay: military personnel and their families. Military families not only bear the full burden of costs for abortion care, but in some circumstances they are actively blocked from receiving it even with out-of-pocket funds. Actively inhibiting the provision of a vital health service to personnel and their families is a reprehensible failure by the American state in its ethical and equity obligations to those who put their lives on the line.
What Are The Laws and Rules Regulating Military Abortion Access?
Under current US law,* there are two specific legal restrictions on military abortion access: the restriction of funds to pay for procedures and the restriction of facilities in which those procedures can be performed. Under 2013 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the annual bill that funds national defense activities,** Department of Defense funds may not be used to perform abortions except in cases of rape or incest, or if not receiving an abortion would endanger the life of the mother. This restriction applies both to care provided directly by military health facilities and staff and care provided by civilians and paid for through Tricare, the health care and insurance program for military service personnel, their spouses, and their dependent children. The 2013 NDAA also bars military facilities from performing abortions even if they are paid for out of private funds, again excepting cases of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother.
These restrictions create exceptional difficulties for service personnel and their families in search of abortion care, especially for those deployed to countries with limited or no availability of safe, affordable civilian abortion services. This is not a fringe issue; among enlisted women, approximately two-thirds of pregnancies are unplanned, and the rates of unplanned pregnancy across all branches and including both officers and enlisted women are higher than civilian averages. While not all of these service personnel will necessarily want to seek abortions, the funding and facilities bans create major obstacles for those that do. Those deployed to areas without safe civilian facilities must travel out of country, which requires time off and raises the cost of an abortion, if they are able to successfully pursue one at all. Even those living in areas where civilian-provided abortions are safe and legal must often travel long distances and face significant obstacles to obtain an abortion, without any insurance compensation to defray the costs. Of the five states with more than 50,000 active duty personnel, four have the kind of restrictions that mean patients travel further to obtain abortions and delay seeking care longer because of cost or inconvenience, even as those same restrictions may prevent them from receiving later-term abortion care at all.
The effect of these restrictions is to deny equal constitutional rights to persons serving in the military, in ways that further no national security objective and in fact inhibit the ability of women, who make up a growing percentage of the all-volunteer force, to serve fully and effectively in the military.
Take Action
Everyone deserves access to safe, affordable healthcare, but the government’s denial of access to that care for the very people who risk their lives in the name of that government is particularly unfair and unacceptable. You can help support the rights of military personnel and their families:
Contact your representatives to let them know you want them to support the MARCH Act (H.R. 1389/S.777), which would allow abortions to be performed in military facilities with the use of private funds. The bill currently has 58 cosponsors in the House and 20 cosponsors in the Senate; it is supported by the Department of Defense.
While you’re at it, let your representatives know that you support an end to other restrictions of abortion access for personnel and their families, including the funding ban that prevents military healthcare from covering the costs of abortion.
Support your state or city’s abortion fund to help those seeking abortions manage the cost—especially if there’s a base, shipyard, or air field in your area.
* For a detailed history of the regulation of military abortion, which has at various times in the past made abortion both more accessible and less accessible than it is today, see the Congressional Research Service’s Abortion Services and Military Medical Facilities report.
** H.R. 4310, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Sec. 704), 10 U.S.C., Section 1093.
Leah Gates is a doctoral student in International Relations at American University in Washington, DC. Her doctoral research investigates the persistence of violence, such as hazing and sexual assault, within the ranks of military personnel. You can follow her on Twitter.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed a federal lawsuit against the state of Indiana yesterday for a new law that singles-out one clinic for offering the abortion pill.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Planned Parenthood Indiana and Kentucky, calls the new restrictions “unconstitutional” and singles out the sole clinic providing medication abortions for regulation. The law would require clinics offering Mifepristone, the non-surgical abortion-inducing pill, to adhere to the same requirements as surgical facilities.
One clinic in Indiana, located in Lafayette, would be affected by the mandate and pro-choice advocates say the law is specifically targeting that facility.
“Imposing requirements for such things as surgical scrub facilities and surgical recovery rooms, when there is no surgical procedure ever performed at the clinic, is not only unreasonable, it is utterly irrational,” the complaint says.
The legislation is set to take place Jan. 1, 2014.
The Department of Justice filed suit against the state of Texas Thursday for discriminating against minority voters when it passed a voter identification law.
The law, approved in 2011, requires voters to present state-issued photo identification to vote. Federal courts had ruled that Texas did not provide sufficient evidence that the law was not discriminatory. However, after the Supreme Court struck down the formula used to determine which municipalities must submit to preclearance and therefore nullified Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the court decision was undone.
The law requires a Texas driver’s license, personal ID card, or election identification certificate (EIC). However, many counties in Texas don’t have their own driver’s license office “[requiring] some voters to travel approximately 200 miles round trip in order to obtain an EIC” according the suit.
“We will not allow the Supreme Court’s recent decision to be interpreted as open season for states to pursue measures that suppress voting rights,” said U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.
In June, the Supreme Court ruled that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), which determines which districts have to submit changes in their voting practice and regulation regardless of size to the Department of Justice (DOJ) in accordance with Section 5 of the VRA, was unconstitutional. In doing so, the Court essentially nullified Section 5 requiring preclearance in voting regulation changes. Section 5 has been used to stop over 700 discriminatory laws from going into effect between 1982 and 2006.
A 22-year-old American photojournalist was gang-raped in an isolated Mumbai neighborhood Thursday night, Indian police said.
The woman, an intern at an American magazine that has not yet been named, was on-assignment with a male colleague when the attack occurred. Five men tied the colleague’s hands with a belt and beat him. They then took the woman to another part of the lot and raped her.
One man has been arrested and confessed to the crime, police said. He also gave the names of the other four attackers.
The attack is reminiscent of a similar gang rape that occurred in December in New Delhi. In that case, a 23-year-old woman was gang-raped in a New Delhi bus and later died. This most recent assault sparked a silent protest of about 1,000 people Friday night.
In response to the attack in December, the Indian government passed a strict law that increases prison length for rape and makes acid attacks, stalking, voyeurism and the trafficking of women punishable under criminal law.
On Wednesday, the US Naval Academy announced that it will integrate sexual assault prevention into the academic program in an effort combat high rates of sexual assault in the military.
Commandant Captain Bill Byrne, who took over the academy this summer, wants to change the current Sexual Harassement and Assault Prevention Education initiative from after-class trainings to part of the classroom structure starting on “Day One.” The program discusses rape and its psychological effects, consent, dating, the effects of alcohol, and what bystanders can do to stop assault. It is expected to be made part of an introductory Navy leadership class during the spring semester and then incorporated into other classes.
In May, the Department of Defense issued an annual report that showed that sexual assault in the military rose by 35% from 2010 to 2012. The report found that 26,000 members of the military experienced “unwanted sexual contact” in 2012 when answering an anonymous survey – a rate of approximately 70 assaults a day. That number is almost 7,000 instances higher than in 2010. In addition the report found only 3,374 reports of sexual assault were filed, according to the Pentagon. Of those cases filed, fewer than one in 10 ended with a court-martial conviction of sexual assault. In the majority of cases, the alleged attacker faced small administrative punishments or the case was dismissed.
“The leadership division and the faculty are figuring out exactly what it means to the student in the classroom, and we aren’t there yet,” Byrne told reporters. “But I feel good that everybody’s in agreement that it’s the right thing to do.”
The county of Dona Ana, New Mexico has begun to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the state Supreme Court referred a related case to lower courts.
Dona Ana Country Clerk Lynn Ellins announced on Wednesday that the County Clerk’s office would being to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. “After careful review of New Mexico’s laws it is clear that the state’s marriage statutes are gender neutral and do not expressly prohibit Dona Ana County from issuing marriage licenses to same-gender couples,” Ellis wrote in a statement. “Any further denial of marriage licenses to these couples violates the United States and New Mexico Constitution and the New Mexico Human Rights Act. Dona Ana County is upholding New Mexico law by issuing these marriage licenses, and I see no reason to make committed couples in Dona Ana County wait another minute to marry.” The County Clerk’s office issued 42 marriage licenses to same-sex couples by the end of the day.
Currently, there are two court cases in New Mexico challenging the denial of marriage certificates to same-sex couples. However, the New Mexico Supreme Court has refused to hear these cases before they go before a lower court. The ACLU of New Mexico had petitioned to expedite one case.
New Mexico Attorney General Gary King said he would not try to stop the county from issuing licenses.
An Indonesian education official has proposed that all high school-aged girls be required to pass a “virginity exam,” in order to attend school.
Muhammad Rasyid, who leads the education office in South Sumatra’s district of Prabumulih, says the mandate would discourage young girls from premarital sex and promiscuity. Although he said the tests could begin as early as 2014, the proposal has come heavily under fire from public education NGOs and other Indonesian officials.
The test would involve an invasive vaginal exam to determine if the girl’s hymen has been torn. Critics of the plan have noted that hymens can be torn from activities other than sex – including sports or health problems – and that education is a fundamental human right regardless of sexual activeness.
A coalition of educational organizations issued a press release on Wednesday, saying “The purpose of such a test is absurd. The 1945 Constitution as well as the 1999 Human Rights Law stipulate that education is one of every citizen’s constitutional rights. Therefore, the right of access to education cannot be denied under any circumstance. The planned test also violates the 2013 National Education Law, which stipulates that education shall be maintained with justice and without discrimination.”
Nurul Arifin, a female politician from the Golkar Party, called the proposal “discrimination and harassment against women.” Another province attempted to implement a similar plan in 2010, but it was abandoned following a public outcry.
Women in Sweden have started to wear hijabs in public in response to an attack against a pregnant Muslim woman.
Over the weekend, a Muslim woman wearing the hijab had her scarf ripped off and her head slammed into a car. Her attacker shouted racist slurs, prompting the authorities to consider the case a hate crime. She was hospitalized with a concussion, and her case prompted other women to come forward about attacks they themselves have suffered based on their beliefs.
In solidarity, other Swedish women have started to wear the hijab in public and posting photos to Twitter with the hashtag #hijabuppropet (#hijaboutcry). The campaign has been joined by politicians Asa Romson and Veronica Palm and TV host Gina Dirawi. Dirawi, who even changed her profile picture is support, tweeted: “Risk of being beaten and discriminated against for how they choose to dress, everyday life for many women in Sweden 2013.”
Men have also joined the campaign, wearing headscarves and tweeting their support. One male supporter tweeted: “Yes wear veils today to show solidarity for all women, are put up with harassment and attacks!”
In an opinion piece published in Aftonbladet by #hijauppropet organizers, that demanded that Justice Minister Beatrice Ask and Swedish lawmakers “ensure that Swedish Muslim women are guaranteed the right to personal safety and religious freedom, without being subject to verbal and physical attacks.”
“In addition, we demand that responsible politicians actively draw attention to and fight the structural discrimination that affects Muslim women,” they wrote. “We believe that’s reason enough in a country where the number of reported hate crimes against Muslims is on the rise – and where women tie their headscarves extra tight so that it won’t get ripped off – for the prime minister and other politicians to take action to stop the march of fascism.”
Minister Ask has agreed to meet with the campaign members on Tuesday, and told reporters the situation “must be taken very seriously.” No arrests have yet been made in the case.
A law legalizing same-sex marriage in New Zealand takes effect today.
The country’s Births, Deaths, and Marriages department reported that 31 same-sex couples planned to wed the first day the law went into effect. They also reported that over 1,000 marriage applications were downloaded in a week since they became available for same sex couples, about three times the average download rate. New Zealand is the 14th country worldwide to legalize same-sex marriage and is the first in the Asia-Pacific.
Paul McCarthy, an Australian resident who married his partner Trent Kandler , told Reuters “Being able to marry here as an equal citizen, even though we’re not citizens of this country, means we’re being viewed as equal – and that’s all we really want.”
Reverend Matt Tittle, who performed the ceremony for another same sex couple who took advantage of the new law, told reporters, “The world is still a dangerous and even deadly place for gay, bisexual and transgender people. We thank God that’s not true in New Zealand. All love is holy.” The law was passed by Parliament in April by a vote of 77 to 40, despite opposition from religious groups.
A new report reveals that women in Papua New Guinea (PNG) face severe gender-based violence, affecting two thirds of families.
The study, by Australian organization ChildFund, was based on interviews [PDF] with 37 women and 14 men in four different villages. In the interviews, women reported being attacked with knives, axes, and whips. One woman was beaten by her husband using the body of their unconscious one-year old child.
Another woman, Helen, had her lower lip bitten off in a random attack by a stranger near her home in the capital city. She told interviewers [PDF] “Sometimes when I sleep, I dream he will come to me and I am really scared about it. I think he is coming back again.”
None of the women interviewed told ChildFund that their husband had not beaten them.
Nigel Spence, CEO of ChildFund, told reporters “It is appalling the level of inaction, taken against these instances of violence, and despite recent statements by the Prime Minister, which are very welcome, there’s a huge amount to be done for government to improve its effort, to take this issue seriously.”
According to AFP, life expectancy for women in Papua New Guinea is 65 years, and the Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) reports that 70% of PNG women will be raped or experience violence in their lifetime. The country is ranked 134 out of 148 countries in the UNDP Gender Inequality Index.
Afghan member of Parliament, Fariba Ahmadi Kakar, and her three children were kidnapped on Saturday while they were traveling in Ghanzi by members of the Taliban. Kakar’s two daughters and son have been released after an operation lead by NATO forces and Afghan intelligence. Kakar remains in custody.
The kidnappers have demanded the release of four Taliban prisoners in exchange for Kakar’s freedom. According to a spokesperson for the Parliament, it is the first time a member of Parliament has been kidnapped in 10 years.
This abduction is the most recent in a long string of attacks on high profile women leaders in the region. Last week, a female senator and her family were attacked by Taliban gunmen, who killed the senator’s eight year old daughter and left the senator wounded. In March, a female teacher in Pakistan was murdered on her way to teach at a girls school. And in December 2012, the head of Women’s Affairs in Laghman province was killed just months after assuming the role after her predecessor was murdered in July of the same year.
