Half of U.S. States are Leaving Women Workers Behind

This piece originally appeared on Ms. Magazine’s digital site

After a year that has put parents—especially women—through unimaginable strain as they’ve struggled to keep a roof over their families’ heads and care for their children, Republican governors in 24 states now want to rip out the rug from under them by ending state participation in federal pandemic unemployment programs. 

These states have made the unprecedented decision to pull out early from the $300 pandemic unemployment benefits—needed support for families that was provided entirely by the federal government at no cost to state coffers. Eighteen of these states have also signaled that they will end the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC) programs, which have been crucial for workers that are typically left out of traditional unemployment insurance. As a result, as many as 4 million of the 15.9 million workers currently on benefits (nearly one in four on benefits) will lose aid as early as June 12—a trend that will have significant negative impacts on families and the still fragile U.S. economy. 

The ostensible rationale for these punitive actions is a concern about workers’ hesitance to accept jobs. But recent data indicates that unemployment aid is not keeping workers on the sidelines.

  • Layoffs have fallen dramatically, as new claims for jobless benefits are now down 48 percent since the beginning of the year.
  • The number of workers filing ongoing claims for state benefits has plummeted to 3.68 million—down 36 percent from when the $300 was reinstated at the beginning of the year.
  • PEUC and PUA benefits fell to their lowest levels in three months, dropping by more than two million since March 6: PUA ticked down by 678,000 to 6.6 million and PEUC dropped by 150,000 to 5.1 million—as even those workers with the greatest barriers are finding work.

In other words, emergency unemployment aid is doing what it is meant to do: serving as a temporary lifeline while workers search for and return to work. 

Aid must continue until the recovery is much further along, especially for women who have born the burden of the COVID “she-cession.” In February 2021, women’s labor force participation was at 57 percent, the lowest it has been since 1988. As of April 2021, nearly 2 million women have left the labor force within the last year, marking a little more than a year of the pandemic. The pandemic has hit Black women and Latinas particularly hard: More than one in 12 adult Black women and nearly one in 13 adult Latinas were unemployed in April 2021.

The pandemic has exacerbated the national child care crisis that has made it harder for women to stay in the labor force, continue to work at the same level of hours, or advance in their careers. A recent survey by The Hamilton Project found 16 percent of mothers with young children reported that someone in their household left their job to undertake child care responsibilities in 2020, and in those cases, 70 percent were the mothers themselves who left their job for child care responsibilities. We all lose when women are left behind, with the U.S. economy at risk of losing an estimated $64.5 billion in additional wages and economic activity. 

COVID-19 laid bare issues that existed pre-pandemic: The United States has never built the care infrastructure needed, and for decades the U.S. has consistently fallen behind peer nations when it comes to female labor force participation. Those working in child care, nearly all of whom are women, also feel squeezed. In a December 2020 survey of child care workers, more than half of respondents reported that they are losing money every day they remain open and one in seven child care jobs have been lost since the pandemic. Child care jobs are disproportionately held by women of color, a group which has suffered major job losses across the board during COVID-19, making an equitable recovery from the pandemic even more crucial.

And now, unemployed women in 24 states are being tasked with an impossible challenge: Go find a job while you have no one to look after your kids. The American Rescue Plan funds promise to prop up the child care sector, but the funds have not even gotten out the door in most states and these 24 governors are not giving that aid a chance to succeed.

It’s too soon to cut off the life preserver keeping working moms afloat. Yes, 285 million vaccine doses have been given, and yes, job losses are no longer as dire as they once were earlier in the pandemic. But, two out of five school districts are either virtual or hybrid learning, meaning many kids are still not physically in school and their parents are scrambling to find options while they learn remotely. Regardless of employment status, married or cohabiting women and single women reported bearing the brunt of child care responsibilities and are most likely to be the one to take time out of paid work to care for children. Making matters worse, most of the states pulling out of expanded UI programs would deny workers regular state UI benefits if they could not work because they lost child care.  

While one recent study concluded that parental employment had not dropped further than other groups, multiple additional studies found that labor force participation (including looking for work) had dropped steeply especially for mothers with young children. And, the bottom line is that research indicates that if the goal is drawing more working parents into the job market, it won’t be solved without reopening schools and increasing access to affordable child care.

After an unprecedented year, the U.S. labor market is now steadily returning to normal, with programs like unemployment benefits having played a major role in preventing poverty among the jobless. But rather than allowing workers a chance to receive critical aid until jobs and infrastructure like child care have more widely returned, policymakers have left the unemployed, particularly women, fully on their own, creating bigger gaps between the haves and have-nots. 

$200 Million of American Rescue Plan Will Support Domestic Violence Survivors and Their Children

This piece originally appeared on Ms. Magazine’s digital site

During the pandemic, domestic violence in the U.S. rose by more than 8.1 percent, according to the National Commission on COVID-19 and Criminal Justice—and this number is still increasing. Economic hardships, including unemployment, financial and food insecurity, burdens from child care and homeschooling, have exacerbated the triggers for these incidents. Simultaneously, during the peak of the pandemic, access to safety and support was nearly impossible.

In response to this rise in domestic violence (which the U.N. is calling “the shadow pandemic“), the Biden administration last week confirmed it will allocate $200 million from the American Rescue Plan (ARP) to support services for domestic violence survivors.

“As we all know, the pandemic and its economic impact significantly increased the risks of abuse for victims of domestic violence and made it much harder for them to seek safety and support,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters at a White House briefing. 

The support will be funneled through the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act program—the primary federally-funded program focused on emergency shelter and services specifically for victims of domestic violence and their children. Domestic violence services supported will include:

  • 296 supplemental grant awards in every state and territory.
  • supplementary funding for state coalitions, national resource centers.
  • supplemental funding for tribes.
  • specialized services for abused parents and children.
  • additional funding for national domestic violence hotlines.

“The Biden American Rescue Plan is about the children, their health, their education [and] the economic security of their families,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told her colleagues before the final ARP vote. “This legislation is one of the most transformative and historic bills any of us will ever have an opportunity to support.”

Apart from direct financial relief through stimulus checks, the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill includes provisions for other feminist issues that directly and indirectly impact domestic abuse victims—like adequate funding for schools and child care centers to ensure safe reopenings; a temporary increase to the child tax credit; $25 billion in rental and housing assistance and $5 billion in emergency vouchers for those suffering homelessness, domestic violence victims, and victims of human trafficking; $50 million in increased funding to the Title X Family Planning Program; and access to health care through lower health insurance premiums and a 100 percent federal COBRA subsidy.

While the ARP was passed into law this spring, access to benefits have been staggered. The stimulus checks started to be sent out in March; unemployment insurance has been extended until September 6, 2021; the COBRA subsidy is set through September 1; President Biden opened a special health care enrollment period through May 15; and monthly child tax credit checks will start arriving to households in July.

While the next several months will be formative in the sustainability and development of further relief, Biden’s “Build Back Better” three-part agenda is only one-third approved: The American Jobs Plan (in progress) and The American Families Plan (introduced) still need to be passed into law to rescue, rebuild and recover the country.

Extending relief and formally prioritizing the needs of women is essential. Valuing their direct effects on the economy and their essential work within families, relieving their burdens of child care and children’s education, and especially protecting domestic violence survivors will create a sustainable future for all Americans.

Katherine Clark Introduces Reproductive Rights Are Human Rights Act

This piece originally appeared on Ms. Magazine’s digital site

On Wednesday, Assistant House Speaker Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) and U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) introduced the Reproductive Rights are Human Rights Act to direct the State Department to permanently include reviews on the status of sexual and reproductive rights in its annual human rights reports. The act has 122 co-sponsors.

“Reproductive rights are human rights,” said Clark. “The ability to access reproductive care is a key part of the survival and success of women, girls and LGBTQ+ people around the world. The State Department’s human rights reports empower lawmakers to take action against bad actors, enact policy, and advocate for the fair treatment of all people. We have to permanently include reproductive rights in that reporting to maintain current human rights standards and meet the real needs of our international partners.”

In 2017, the Trump administration deleted all subsections on reproductive rights from the State Department’s annual human rights reports. This move was part of a coordinated effort to undermine the legitimacy of sexual and reproductive rights as human rights. While President Biden has reversed that policy, Clark wants to ensure that this critical information is never blocked again, regardless of who is president.

“Women’s fundamental human rights do not change with U.S. administrations,” said Amanda Klasing, interim women’s rights co-director at Human Rights Watch. “They are part and parcel of the international human rights system. State Department reporting on violations of reproductive rights should not be subject to whiplash between the policies of the occupants of the White House. Congress has an important role to ensure that the U.S. is consistently and unbiasedly reporting on the rights violations that impact women around the world, without political interference.”

Federal law requires the secretary of state to report annually to Congress on the status of human rights in nearly 200 countries around the world. This information is used by lawmakers, human rights bodies and the private sector to address human rights violations across the world.

“Sexual and reproductive rights are human rights—full stop,” said Caitlin Horrigan, director of global advocacy, Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “Everyone deserves access to comprehensive health care, no matter who they are or where they live. The State Department cannot ever be allowed to censor their reports and ignore reproductive rights.”

The Reproductive Rights Are Human Rights Act would require reporting on contraception and abortion access, STD rates and prevention efforts, maternal health, and rates and causes of pregnancy-related injuries and death, including unsafe abortions.

For example, the law requires reporting on how states are acting to promote access to “safe, effective, and affordable methods of contraception and comprehensive, accurate, nondiscriminatory family planning and sexual health information.” It would also include reporting on whether states have adopted and enforced policies to “expand or restrict access to safe abortion services or post-abortion care, or to criminalize pregnancy-related outcomes, including spontaneous miscarriages or pregnancies outside of marriage.”

The bill pays particular attention to health disparities. It requires disaggregating maternal health data to better understand disparities in pregnancy-related outcomes, especially for low-income and marginalized communities based on “race, ethnicity, Indigeneity, language, age, religion or any other identity.”

Gayatri Patel, vice president of external relations at Women’s Refugee Commission (WFC), says the bill addresses a critical issue: “Among the most marginalized globally are refugee women and youth,” said Patel, citing a recent WRC study showing “refugees, including adolescents and persons with disabilities, face heightened barriers to sexual and reproductive health in humanitarian settings—despite demand.”

The bill explicitly recognizes that “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex persons (LGBTQI+) face stigma and discrimination in accessing reproductive health services, and barriers, including anti-LGBTQI+ laws, policies, and gender norms in countries.” As such, it requires the Department of State report the denial of access to sexual and reproductive health care due to these barriers in the annual human rights reports.

The law also addresses reproductive coercion, defined as “any behavior that interferes with autonomous decision-making about reproductive health outcomes.” The bill requires the State Department to report on “discrimination, coercion and violence” against women, girls and LGBTQI+ individuals in all health care settings, including in detention. This includes “obstetric violence, involuntary or coerced abortion, involuntary or coerced pregnancy, coerced sterilization, use of incentives or disincentives to lower or raise fertility, withholding of information on reproductive health options, and other forms of reproductive and sexual coercion.”

Clark says the legislation “ensures that detailed information on any deprivation of people’s access to reproductive rights is monitored, reported on, and used to inform policy.” The State Department reports are important, bringing accountability for “countries that impede on those rights, either by enabling violence or prohibiting care.”

“Reproductive health and rights is about freedom—whether people want to pursue an education, secure a job, or have a family, comprehensive health care is a necessity,” Clark continued. “We owe it to the global community to ensure that the United States is committed to reproductive justice for all.”

At a time when reproductive rights are under threat within the U.S. as well as around the world, this bill will not only improve foreign policy, but send a message to our international partners about the importance of reproductive freedom.

“No matter where you call home, health care should be a right—and that includes reproductive health care,” said Clark. “We cannot waiver on this right depending on who is in the White House. When America is silent, or worse, promoting an anti-reproductive health agenda, women, sexual assault survivors, refugees, LGBTQ individuals, and other groups who face systemic barriers to health care around the world suffer. We must permanently include reproductive rights in the State Department’s annual human rights reports to send a message to our international partners that the United States believes reproductive rights are human rights.”

“As reproductive rights are under daily assault across the world, the United States must lead the collective commitment to advance fundamental rights and freedoms for all rather than undermine the rights of some,” said Menendez. “With this bicameral bill, we are doing our part to stand in solidarity with women, girls and LGBTQI+ people the world over whose access to vital sexual and reproductive health care has been severely obstructed or entirely suspended. … We are making sure lawmakers get the full, unvarnished picture of a nation’s human rights record when formulating U.S. foreign policy.”

The bill is part of a larger legislative push to promote reproductive justice within U.S. foreign policy. Anu Kumar, president and CEO of Ipas, calls Clark’s bill “an important part of a crucial legislative effort, along with the Abortion is Health Care Everywhere Act and the Global HER Act, that will bring us closer to reproductive justice for millions of people.”

The Abortion is Health Care Act would permanently reverse the Helms Amendment and replace it with a policy supporting U.S. funding for safe abortion services worldwide. The Global HER Act would repeal the global gag rule, prohibiting recipients of U.S. funding from speaking about abortion.

“We applaud Rep. Clark, Sen. Menendez, and other health care champions in Congress for reaffirming that reproductive rights are human rights and ensuring that is reflected in annual State Department reports,” said Horrigan from Planned Parenthood. “Congress must swiftly pass the Reproductive Rights are Human Rights Act into law.” 

“The Hill We Climb”: Inaugural Poet Amanda Gorman Makes Her Mark

Millions of Americans were inspired by Wednesday’s inauguration ceremony, at which the first Black, Asian and female vice president took her oath of office. But perhaps equally moving was the contribution of 22-year-old Amanda Gorman, the youngest poet to ever speak at a presidential inauguration—demonstrating the strength of a new generation at this crucial turning point in American history.

The sixth poet to recite at a presidential inauguration, Gorman follows in the footsteps of distinguished poets such as Maya Angelou and Robert Frost. In her poem, titled “The Hill We Climb,” Gorman struck a chord of unity, bridging pain of the past with hope for a better future.

“In my poem, I’m not going to in any way gloss over what we’ve seen over the past few weeks and, dare I say, the past few years. But what I really aspire to do in the poem is to be able to use my words to envision a way in which our country can still come together and can still heal,” she told the New York Times, ahead of her performance. “It’s doing that in a way that is not erasing or neglecting the harsh truths I think America needs to reconcile with.”

Gorman, a Los Angeles native, has been a growing force for several years. She became the Youth Poet Laureate of Los Angeles at age 16, and the first National Youth Poet Laureate in history soon after.

As a high school student at New Roads School in Santa Monica, she worked Feminist Majority Foundation’s Girls Learn International program, empowering fellow young women to pursue educational opportunities. (Feminist Majority Foundation is the publisher of Ms.) Gorman graduated from Harvard University with a degree in sociology last year.

She acknowledged the historical significance of her selection within “The Hill We Climb,” describing “a country and a time where a skinny [B]lack girl descended from slaves and raised by a single mother can dream of becoming president, only to find herself reciting for one.”

Gorman has also battled a speech impediment, similar to President Joe Biden, which she says drew her to poetry as a child.

“Having an arena in which I could express my thoughts freely was just so liberating that I fell head over heels, you know, when I was barely a toddler,” she said. “Maya Angelou was mute growing up as a child and she grew up to deliver the inaugural poem for President Bill Clinton. … So I think there is a real history of orators who have had to struggle with a type of imposed voicelessness, you know, having that stage in the inauguration.”

“The writing process is its own excruciating form, but as someone with a speech impediment, speaking in front of millions of people presents its own type of terror,” Gorman added.

Though a daunting task, she managed to blow listeners away with her five-minute recitation, soon reaching an even wider audience on social media. Her poem was met with high praise by public figures, from President Barack Obama to Oprah to Lin-Manuel Miranda.

“The Hill We Climb” reads, in part:

We’ve seen a force that would shatter our nation rather than share it,

Would destroy our country if it meant delaying democracy.

And this effort very nearly succeeded.

But while democracy can be periodically delayed,

It can never be permanently defeated.

In this truth, in this faith, we trust.

For while we have our eyes on the future,

history has its eyes on us.

Gorman had begun writing her inaugural poem prior to Wednesday, Jan. 6, when insurrectionists stormed the U.S. Capitol, launching an attack on American democracy. But she completed the second half of her poem—including the above excerpt—in response.

Her message sows the seeds of unity while upholding accountability and reconciliation:

“We will not be turned around or interrupted by intimidation because we know our inaction and inertia will be the inheritance of the next generation. Our blunders become their burdens.

“But one thing is certain, if we merge mercy with might and might with right, then love becomes our legacy and change our children’s birthright.”

“We will rebuild, reconcile and recover in every known nook of our nation, in every corner called our country our people diverse and beautiful will emerge battered and beautiful,” Gorman concluded. “When day comes, we step out of the shade aflame and unafraid. The new dawn blooms as we free it. For there is always light. If only we’re brave enough to see it. If only we’re brave enough to be it.”

Biden Recruits Veteran Policy Adviser Susan Rice: “We All Rise or Fall Together”

12/16/2020 by SOPHIE DORF-KAMIENNY

President-Elect Joe Biden appointed Ambassador Susan Rice to serve as director of the Domestic Policy Council in his administration, alongside four other domestic nominees, on Friday, Dec. 11.

Rice, who has served in policy roles under multiple administrations, spoke alongside Biden and Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris to accept her nomination.

“Today we confront a profoundly connected set of crises: a relentless pandemic, a struggling economy, urgent demands for racial equity and justice, a climate in need of healing, a democracy in need to repair, and a world in need of renewed American leadership. In the 21st century, our foreign economic and domestic imperatives are deeply intertwined,” Rice began. “Tackling these challenges is personal to me. I am a descendant of immigrants and the enslaved, and service is in our blood.”

Rice discussed her paternal family’s journey from slaves to soldiers, and her maternal grandmother’s immigration to the U.S. from Jamaica.

“But today, for far too many, the American dream has become an empty promise, a cruel mockery of lives held back by barriers, new and old. That is not good enough for any American. But we know that, throughout our history, Americans have forged opportunity out of crisis,” Rice said. “Now, at the foot of yet another bridge between crisis and opportunity, I’m honored and excited to take on this role… I profoundly believe that we all rise or fall together. Absolutely all of us.”

Under the Obama administration, Rice held the position of national security adviser, as well as U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations. During Bill Clinton’s presidency, she was U.S. assistant secretary of state for African affairs, among other key national security roles.

Prior to the beginning of Biden’s administration, Rice was co-chair of D.C. mayor Muriel Bowser’s Reopen D.C. Advisory Commission, working to oversee Washington D.C.’s safe reopening in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.

In introducing Rice on Friday, Biden admitted that he “spent some time convincing this wonderful public servant,” but is ecstatic for her to return to the federal government come Jan. 20, 2021.

“A granddaughter of immigrants, a descendant of enslaved people, Susan will be an effective and tireless champion for all Americans,” Biden said. “And she knows I’m really thrilled she was willing to come back, be at my side in the White House.”

Katherine Tai Appointed as U.S. Trade Rep.: “I Am Very Proud to Be an Advocate For American Workers”

12/16/2020 by SOPHIE DORF-KAMIENNY for msmagazine.com


President-Elect Joe Biden is nominating and appointing a record number of diverse women to hold leadership roles in the Biden-Harris administration. Allow Ms. to introduce you to all the women appointed to join this historic administration.

President-Elect Joe Biden appointed Katherine Tai to serve as United States Trade Representative (USTR) in his administration, alongside four other domestic nominees, on Friday, Dec. 11.

Tai, who would be the first Asian American and first woman of color to serve in this capacity, accepted her appointment in a moving speech, reflecting on her childhood as the daughter of immigrants:


“Trade is like any other tool in our domestic or foreign policy. It is not an end in itself. It is a means to create more hope and opportunity for people. And it only succeeds when the humanity and dignity of every American and of all people lie at the heart of our approach,” Tai said.

“I am proud to join with leaders who instill their policy with purpose and who never lose sight of the humanity and dignity, the opportunity and hope that make trade a force for good in our nation and the world. I am very proud to be an advocate for American workers, to stand up for their ingenuity and their innovation and for America’s interests across the globe.”


As chief trade counsel, Tai currently serves as the House Ways and Means Committee’s chief lawyer. She previously held the titles of Associate General Counsel and Chief Counsel for China Trade Enforcement in the USTR’s Office of the General Counsel.

She was the first of her family to be born in America, and went on to attend Yale University and Harvard Law School. However, she also worked in Guangzhou, China teaching English in the late 90s, eventually becoming a Yale-China Fellow. Tai is deeply experienced in matters of U.S.-China trade relations, having litigated such disputes for the U.S. at the World Trade Organization (WTO).


In her remarks on Friday, Tai recalled representing the U.S. in a lawsuit against China with a USTR colleague, who happened to be the daughter of South Indian immigrants.

“Two daughters of immigrants, there to serve, to fight for and to reflect the nation that had opened doors of hope and opportunity to our families,” Tai said. “Those memories fill me with gratitude for being an American and for what America is at our best and they remind me of the extraordinary responsibilities that come with the honor as we navigate our relationships with the world.”

Biden expressed confidence in his pick for the position, praising Tai’s pristine record in public service.

“[Tai] earned praise for both lawmakers and both political parties and from both labor and business as well. Now that’s a feat across the board,” Biden said. “But all kidding aside, I’ve gotten more calls complimenting me on your appointment than you can imagine.”

Dr. Rochelle Walensky Appointed CDC Director

In a series of nominations for health leaders in his administration, President-Elect Joe Biden tapped Dr. Rochelle Walensky to head up the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as director.

“I never anticipated I would take on a role helping lead our national response, and government service was never part of my plan. But every doctor knows that when a patient is coding, your plans don’t matter. You answer the code. And when the nation is coding, if you are called to serve, you serve,” Walensky said. 

“You run to take care of people, to stop the bleeding, to stabilize, to give them hope and a fighting chance to come back stronger. That’s what doctors do. I’m honored to work with an administration that understands that leading with science is the only way to deliver breakthroughs, to deliver hope, and to bring our nation back to full strength.”

Walensky spoke of her background confronting the AIDS pandemic, beginning as a medical student at Johns Hopkins University. She went on to be a leader in HIV/AIDS research and screening, from the U.S. to South Africa and even at the United Nations.

“As a medical student, I saw firsthand how the virus ravaged bodies and communities. Inside the hospital, I witnessed people lose strength and hope. While outside the hospital, I witnessed those same patients, mostly gay men and members of vulnerable communities, be stigmatized and marginalized by their nation and many of its leaders,” Walensky said. “Now, a new virus is ravaging us. It’s striking hardest, once again, at the most vulnerable, the marginalized, the underserved.” 

She is currently chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases at Massachusetts General Hospital, in addition to teaching at Harvard Medical School. 

Her experience with the HIV/AIDS response expanded her knowledge of widespread testing, which she intends to apply to the COVID-19 pandemic. Biden also spoke of her research on vaccine delivery, especially in marginalized communities.

“She’s uniquely qualified to restore morale and public trust,” Biden said.

Georgians Unite to Make “Good Trouble” in Marches and Votercades Across the State

On Monday, Dec. 14, Black and Brown voters in cities across Georgia are joined community organizers for John Lewis “Good Trouble” marches and votercades.

Black and Brown voters in cities across Georgia are joined the Georgia Coalition for the Peoples’ Agenda, the Transformative Justice Coalition, Rainbow PUSH Coalition, and community organizers for John Lewis “Good Trouble” Marches and Votercades—festive celebrations of voting rights that led voters to the polls for early voting for the U.S. Senate runoffs and Public Service Commission race on Jan 5, 2021.

“We want to bring awareness to the fact that early voting started and encourage people along the route to join us to get into some ‘Good Trouble’ and vote,” said Helen Butler, executive director of the Georgia Coalition for the Peoples’ Agenda.

“The Votercades create a level of excitement that inspires Black and Brown people to vote in the special election despite tactics like the unjust purging of 200,000 Georgia voters, intentional misinformation, and efforts by Georgia legislators to impose more restrictions on absentee ballots that will affect the runoffs,” said Barbara Arnwine, founder and president of the Transformative Justice Coalition.

The John Lewis March and Caravan was designed to capture the spirit of the late Congressman’s legacy of getting into “Good Trouble.” There will be subsequent Marches held during the month to continue to bring attention to the urgent need for voters to finish the job they started by voting.

Rep. Marcia Fudge to Head Housing and Urban Development: “We Will Help People Believe Once Again”

In a recent series of nominations, President-Elect Joe Biden chose Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio) to join his Cabinet as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. She will be the second Black woman to hold the position, and first in the past 40 years.

“When I think about the enormity of the task ahead of us, I am reminded of the book of Matthew, where it is written, ‘Foxes have holes, birds have nests, but the son of man has no place to lay his head,’” Fudge said. “There is dignity and there is grace within every woman, every man, and every child in this nation, including those who live on the outskirts of hope, those who work hard but still struggle to make it work and those who have no place to lay their head. It is one of the highest responsibilities of our government to see them, to see their dignity and to lift them up.”

Fudge has served in Congress since 2008, and has experience on the Committees on House Administration, Agriculture, and Education and Labor, in addition to being former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus. Before coming to Capitol Hill, she was the first woman mayor of Warrensville Heights, Ohio. 

She is expected to continue advancing affordable housing efforts along with other components of a strong safety net, especially given the devastating impacts of the pandemic.

“Perhaps most importantly of all, we will help people believe once again, that their government cares about them no matter who they are. That we understand their problems. As the president-elect often recalls his father’s words, I am honored to have this chance to help restore the people’s faith, to deliver for them and make them proud and to build back better alongside this dedicated team,” Fudge said.

Fudge also previously served as national president of the Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, composed of predominantly Black female college students and alumni.

“I know from this day how powerful the Deltas are. You think I’m kidding, I’m not,” Biden teased.

“I might add, you could do many jobs beyond the one I’m asking you to do,” Biden said when introducing Fudge. “But I think the job I’m asking you to do, Congresswoman, is critically important to everything that the vice president and I believe is how we’re going to build back better.”

As Kamala Harris Becomes Vice President, Feminists Urge Gov. Newsom to #AppointABlackWoman in Her Place

“Our representative democracy is supposed to represent us,” urges a joint letter—part of a recent push from a coalition of notable feminists to convince California Gov. Gavin Newsom to replace Vice President-Elect Harris’s Senate seat with another Black woman.

Presently, the number of Black women in the Senate totals just one—Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris.

And while feminists continue to celebrate Harris’s ceiling-shattering victory as an incredible milestone, her leaving the legislative branch of the Senate to join the executive branch as second-in-command will drop the number of Black women in the Senate down to zero—that is, unless a recent push from a diverse group of feminists can convince California Gov. Gavin Newsom to replace Harris with another Black woman.

Newsom is the focus of multiple efforts urging him to appoint a Black woman to fill the remainder of Harris’s term, including a joint letter from over 200 women leaders, philanthropists and activists.

In a press conference on Thursday, signatories of the letter—including Dolores Huerta; Aimee Allison, founder of She the People; Black Lives Matter co-founder Alicia Garza; Alfre Woodard, actor and activist; Women’s Foundation California CEO Surina Khan; Kathy Spillar, executive director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and executive editor of Ms.; Susan Pritzker, philanthropist and Women’s Foundation board member; and others—underscored their message.

In the Senate’s 231 years, only five women of color have served, according to the Center for American Women and Politics: Carol Moseley Braun (D-Ill.), a Black woman, was the first woman of color elected to the U.S. Senate, serving from 1993 to 1999; and at present, Kamala Harris serves alongside three other women of color: Sens. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii); Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.); and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.).

“Women know exactly what it feels like to be passed over and looked over—even though they are qualified for positions of power,” said Garza, at Thursday’s press conference, hosted by the Feminist Majority Foundation, Women’s Foundation California, Dolores Huerta and She the People. “For too long in this country, we have had our lives governed by people who don’t live our lives. … We must make sure we break this trend.”

“There is a long list of very qualified, ready-to-go Black women here in California who would both honor the legacy [of Kamala Harris] and provide us with the representation we all deserve and desperately need right now,” said Pritzker.

But who?

The coalition of feminist leaders has rallied around two Black women replacements in particular. The first is Rep. Barbara Lee of California’s 13th congressional district, which includes Oakland. The only African American woman in Democratic Leadership (serving as co-chair of the Policy and Steering Committee), Lee has advocated for legislation aimed at fighting poverty and hunger, ending HIV/AIDS, and providing legislative oversight.

The second woman being considered for Harris’s seat is Rep. Karen Bass of California’s 37th district, which encompasses a large portion of Los Angeles County. Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, Bass boasts legislative priorities like restoring voting rights, protecting and strengthening health care access, and enforcing criminal justice reform.

Californians elected Kamala Harris—and she should be replaced with someone who looks and thinks like her, argued Woodard during Thursday’s press conference: “That person would be a woman of color, and in particular, a Black woman. … an advocate, an activator. In Congresswomen Karen Bass and Barbara Lee, we have a duo that fills those shoes perfectly without breaking stride.”

Reports say Newsom is also eyeing Secretary of State Alex Padilla to finish out the last two years of Harris’s six-year term, ending in 2022. At the same time women’s groups have upped the pressure on the governor to pick a woman of color, so too have Latino organizations and legislators who advocate for Padilla. But advocates of the #AppointABlackWoman movement say increasing the number of Black women in political leadership is long overdue.

“Women’s voices are desperately needed—but Black women’s voices are particularly needed in this time of history,” said Huerta, when asked by a reporter why not a Latino/a replacement. “As a Latina, I do believe that at this unique moment in history to represent us all … it will be a giant step toward political equality and representation.”

“The fact that today represents a multiracial force of women calling Governor Newsom to appoint a Black woman should speak volumes,” said Aimee Allison, founder and president of She the People, an Oakland-based organization. “We cannot backslide: Senator Harris cannot be the only woman of color at the table from our state.”


If you too want to speak up about the need for Newsom to appoint a woman of color to Kamala Harris’s seat, you can write to the governor’s chief of staff, Ann O’Leary (ann.oleary@gov.ca.gov), to tell her why you believe appointing a woman of color to the Senate is what’s best for the U.S.

Know Your November Ballot: Reproductive Rights

In the weeks leading up to Election Day, Ms. will be outlining state ballot initiatives and referenda of major significance to women.

I know what you’re (wishfully) thinking: By 2012, American women should already have easy access to, and public funding for, abortions—with the most minimal-to-nonexistent restrictions.

Unfortunately, the opposite is true: In state legislatures across the nation, more and more women are being stripped of access to safe and legal abortions.

2011 and 2012 saw a rise in unnecessary laws, including mandated counseling, 24- to 72-hour waiting periods, increased funding to crisis pregnancy centers, and the Most Hated Anti-Choice Law winner: forced ultrasounds (knocked down a notch from forced transvaginal ultrasounds).

Don’t forget—you can’t even say the word “vagina” in mixed company in Michigan!

At the state level, these restrictions continue to be introduced at an alarming rate. And since it wouldn’t be a presidential election without attacks on abortion rights, several states are including constitutional amendments and referendums on their ballots in November—which is why pro-choice women need to be informed about the attacks on reproductive rights. If you live in one of these states, the power is now in your vote.

Florida: Amendment 6

Because of the Hyde Amendment, federal Medicaid funding cannot be used toward abortion procedures except in cases of rape, incest and the life of the woman. However, a number of states in the U.S. allow public funds to be used to cover abortions in certain cases (see graphic at right). Florida’s Amendment 6 will reverse its standing on the matter, amending its state constitution to prohibit the use of public funds for abortions and disallowing health insurance policies that cover abortions. Amendment 6 will also erase the state’s right-to-privacy provision, which says that individuals (including minors) are protected from governmental intrusion in their personal lives.

Florida’s right-to-privacy provision is one of the strongest in the nation; the Florida Supreme Court has even ruled that if Roe v. Wade were ever overturned, Florida would remain a pro-choice state. Amendment 6 not only makes it harder for women to pay for an abortion, but will certainly open the door to more intrusive abortion legislation.

Vote: NO

 

Montana: Legislative Referendum 120

Referendum 120 would mandate a doctor to notify a parent or legal guardian at least 48 hours prior to performing an abortion on a young woman under 16. If she wants to have an abortion without her parents knowing—perhaps because she is a victim of incest or has abusive parents—the only way out of this requirement is a waiver from a judge. Referendum 120 would also criminalize parents who coerce a girl to have an abortion, but not criminalize those who force a girl to carry a pregnancy to term against her will.

Vote: AGAINST

 

Colorado: Personhood Amendment

In the birthplace for Personhood USA, there’s still a last remaining chance for a personhood measure to be on a 2012 ballot. The Personhood Amendment would change the state’s constitution to define a “person” at “any stage of development,” meaning a fertilized egg would be granted full rights of an American citizen. The results could range from confounding (can you claim your fetus as a dependent on your taxes?) to frightening (criminalizing miscarriages and outlawing abortions, the morning-after pill and other forms of contraception).

Though grassroots personhood movements can be found now in nearly every state, every personhood ballot initiative has failed when open to statewide vote. In Colorado, this would have been the third time voters could decide whether or not fertilized eggs should be equal to actual people. Personhood advocates did not receive enough signatures on their petition by the ballot deadline, but Personhood Colorado is trying to sue the state, claiming it had enough non-fraudalent signatures.

If it qualifies, vote: NO

Blog by , originally posted on the Ms. blog.
Infographic designed by Lisa Huynh.

Photo at top from Flickr user InSapphoWeTrust under Creative Commons 3.0.

Why “Save Second Base” Shouldn’t Be Our Mantra

For Breast Cancer Awareness Month, the Ms. blog will be running a series of pieces devoted to the disease and activism around it.

It’s fun. It’s flirty. And it grabs a person’s eye. Shirts, baseball caps and rubber bracelets emblazoned with the slogans “Save the tatas,” “Save second base,” “I heart boobies.”

With each Breast Cancer Awareness Month that rolls around, the catchphrases seem to get more ubiquitous. Since this week kicked off another awareness month, I’ve been taking a harder look at the slogans that I once thought clever. They’re a cheeky way to get people, especially men, thinking about breast cancer, but they sacrifice the gravity of the epidemic and replace it with shallow sexual innuendo.

The whole “insert boob-related pun about breast cancer” trend reminds me of a similar obsession that overtook my Facebook newsfeed two years ago. Suddenly, all of my girlfriends’ status updates changed to “I like it on the kitchen counter” or “I like it on my desk” or some iteration of what they liked “it” on.

Eventually when the big secret hit my inbox, I realized they were naming places they liked to put their purses as a part of breast cancer awareness. The hope was that it would pique the interest of men, who would want to know what had caused the inundation of sexually provocative statuses. Though well intentioned, I didn’t see how it had anything to do with breast cancer or funding research.

These sexually colored awareness campaigns may get attention from men, but not in a way that translates to action. On top of that, they grossly underestimate men by assuming they need a sexualized gimmick to get them to care about a social cause. Men who have mothers, wives, sisters and daughters affected by the disease don’t require such tactics to make breast cancer worthy of their attention.

“Save the tatas” also reduces breasts to sexual objects instead of parts of a human being. “Save the women” should be enough to motivate people, but it doesn’t seem to have the same potential to go viral in an awareness campaign.

And let’s not forget, as E! host and breast cancer survivor Giuliana Rancic said before deciding to get a double mastectomy, “Sometimes you can’t ‘save the tatas.” In their battles against breast cancer, many women have to lose their breasts to keep their lives. Even if some opt to undergo reconstruction later on, the feeling is lost forever, which can deal a heavy emotional blow. In one of the first breast cancer memoirs of its kind, First You Cry, NBC correspondent Betty Rollin explored the devastation she felt after losing her breast to cancer and the impact it had on her sexuality. We shouldn’t forget women’s real feelings in our quest for catchy slogans.

How are women with mastectomies supposed to feel when they see these types of slogans? Are they supposed to think that they failed in some way because they couldn’t keep their breasts? Staying alive is the name of the game here, and these phrases overlook that. Not to mention that they exclude and are insensitive to men diagnosed with breast cancer, who definitely don’t have “tatas” to save.

It’s great to raise awareness, but the facts are that the number of women’s lives that breast cancer claims has not changed. It’s remained at 40,000 a year for more than a decade.

Breast cancer is not meant to be sexy. Marketing it as such trivializes it as well as stops people from understanding the disease and focusing on prevention and better treatments. The focus shouldn’t always be on “saving second base,” but on making it all the way to home plate by saving women’s lives.

Guest post by , originally posted on the Ms. blog.
Photo courtesy of ginashoots under Creative Commons 2.0.

Marriage at the Supreme Court

Are you or someone you love in a committed same-sex relationship, hoping to get married?

The national debate over marriage equality is about to enter a new phase, as multiple cases make their way to the United States Supreme Court. SCOTUS begins a new session next Monday, and today, in private conference, the Court will decide which new cases to review. The Proposition 8 case and several cases involving the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) are among those the Court may decide to take up, and their choices today—which could be announced as early as tomorrow but certainly by the start of the session on October 1—will have wide-reaching effects.

Take the Proposition 8 appeal. So far, California’s ban on same-sex marriage has not fared well in court and has been ruled unconstitutional, first by Judge Vaughn Walker, and then by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which  upheld his ruling. Proponents of marriage equality successfully argued that rights shouldn’t be put up to a vote, and that the marriage ban treats lesbians and gays as second-class citizens. Supporters of Prop 8 want the Supreme Court to re-affirm it, and in doing so keep marriage bans around the country intact. If the Court does decide to take the case, the decision could be quite narrow—only concerning California and, perhaps, only concerning situations in which marriage rights were granted prior to a public vote, or it could be a sweeping decision in one direction or the other.

What if the Court decides NOT to hear the Prop 8 case? That would be a disappointment to those on both sides who want to see the case set precedent, but the immediate effect would be hugely positive for same-sex couples eager to marry. Proposition 8 would be removed from the books, and marriage equality would then be legal in the most populous state in the union. Here come the bride-brides and the groom-grooms!

Given that there are other marriage equality cases the Court might take up, it seems likely that the justices will pass on Prop 8. Instead, they’re likely to take those cases concerning DOMA  (an overview may be found here) because DOMA involved an act of Congress and the federal government. The Obama administration has also declared DOMA to be unconstitutional, and in those cases the defense of DOMA will be argued by the House of Representative’s Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG).

At stake in the DOMA cases is the contradictory status of married lesbian and gay couples in states where same-sex marriage is legal. DOMA forces those states to divide citizens into two classes: married couples who can receive federal benefits and married couples who can’t, in effect discriminating against lesbian and gay employees. DOMA requires that employers determine the gender of employees’ spouses and enforces financial inequalities (for instance, benefits provided by employers to the same-sex spouses of employees are taxed as income, while those to opposite-sex employees are not).

The DOMA cases do not take up the question of whether states may prohibit marriages between same-sex couples, however, so a SCOTUS decision would not affect those living in states with same-sex marriage bans. If same-sex marriage becomes legal in California, however, the number of married same-sex couples will dramatically increase, and the issue of second-class citizenship will become even more urgent.

Keep an eye on the Court to see where marriage equality will go next. This is one cliffhanger with the promise of many happy endings!

Blog by Audrey Bilger, originally posted on the Ms. blog.
Photo of Supreme Court bench by Flickr user runJMrun under license from Creative Commons 2.0
. Photo of brides by Flickr user Capt’ Gorgeous under license from Creative Commons 2.0

Men’s Manifesto 2012

I’m proud to be a part of a growing movement—a multiracial, multicultural, global movement of men who are challenging male violence and outdated notions of masculinity.

I have been inspired by, taught by and befriended by men across the world who have dedicated their lives to reducing male violence. Men and boys around the world work for domestic violence programs and rape crisis centers. They donate and raise money for women’s groups. They organize and participate in community walks and wear White Ribbons. Men Can (and do) Stop Rape and Men (are) Stopping Violence. There is a growing Call to Men to become part of the solution.

We men have listened to and learned from women. We often forget to give women the credit they are due, and sometimes claim their ideas as our own. But the heart of this growing men’s movement rests in the intelligence, kindness, confrontation and love from the strong women in our lives.

We are men and boys who are proud to be working to stop male violence. We are proud to be men who welcome non-traditional expressions of what it means to be a man. We will be our own role models, applauding each non-traditional male role model who appears in film and television. As representations of manhood diversify, we will welcome the by-product of such diversity—acceptance and celebration of all varieties of manhood.

We are proud to be gay men and bisexual men. We are proud to be heterosexual men working to end homophobia.

We are proud to be transgender men.

We are proud to be African-American, Latino, Asian/Pacific Islander, Native American men. We are proud to be white male allies against racism and sexism.

We are proud to have survived violence ourselves. We are rape and incest survivors, survivors of intimate partner violence at the hands of women and men.

We work to end all violence against all people, even as we work to end the epidemic of male violence against girls and women.

We love other men. We will boldly express our love of other men with hugs, tears, high-fives, handshakes, holding hands and kisses—sometimes with sex. We will sometimes choose a man as a beloved life partner.

We love women. Knowing that our gender perpetrates violence and sexism, we pledge to change ourselves and the world. Rather than riding in on a white horse, we will partner with women and support women’s leadership in stopping violence and sexism.

We love our families. Those of us who are fathers love our children. We reject the aloof father image. We realize that our children’s happiness depends on treating their mother with dignity, respect and love.

When a boy dresses like a princess, we will embrace him as we embrace the boy who hits a home run. We will embrace boys wearing skirts, boys wearing makeup, boys wearing black and boys with piercings.

When a boy cries, we will comfort him. We will cry with him.

We will celebrate boys with long hair and short hair—running boys and boys in wheelchairs—ballet dancing boys and cheerleader boys. We will celebrate shy boys, singing boys, kind boys and poet boys.

We will stand up against injustice. We will speak out against it, and will listen without defensiveness when it is pointed out in us. Strength as men will be measured not just by how many weights we can lift, but by how well we can listen.

We realize that in pledging to be part of the solution, we also must acknowledge that we have been (and still are) part of the problem.

We pledge to listen to women and learn from women.

We pledge to be accountable to women’s leadership in stopping men’s violence, and to be accountable to our own male privilege.

As the White Ribbon Campaign asks, we pledge to never commit, condone or remain silent about men’s violence against women. We choose to respect, seek equality with and share power with the girls and women in our lives. We encourage, demand and expect other men and boys to do the same.

By Ben Atherton-Zeman, originally posted on the Ms. blog.
Excerpted from
Men Speak Out: Views on Gender, Sex and Power, edited by Shira Tarrant
Images of UK White Ribbon Campaign posters from Flickr user kilcolman under license from Creative Commons 2.0

Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down: A Feminist Look at the Olympics (So Far)

With all of the TV coverage, print and digital news, Facebook updates, Twitter hashtags and blog posts about what’s happening in London, we’ve gathered our favorite (and not so favorite) feminist moments and commentaries from the 2012 Summer Games. Please to share your thoughts in the comments below!

 for British weightlifter Zoe Smith, who spoke out in a blog post against sexist criticism that she and her teammates shouldn’t have big muscles because they’re women. Here are a few of her best quotes:

The obvious choice of slander when talking about female weightlifting is ‘how unfeminine, girls shouldn’t be strong or have muscles, this is wrong’. And maybe they’re right … in the Victorian era. To think people still think like this is laughable, we’re in 2012!

What makes them think that we even WANT them to find us attractive?

[One man who made a hateful remark] came up with the original comeback that I should get back in the kitchen. I laughed.

 For the record number of openly gay and lesbian athletes at the Olympics! Karen Hultzer’s self-outing brings the number to 22, twice as many as the 11 in Athens and the 10 in Beijing.

 For U.S. beach volleyball stars Misty May-Treanor and Kerri Walsh Jennings. But …

 

 For media couture coverage. Despite their huge successes on the court, May-Treanor and Walsh Jennings just can’t seem to win when it comes to what they’re wearing. When the two declared their intentions to compete in bikinis (which, as U.S. teammate Jen Kessy insists, is what the women feel most comfortable in), they were called cheeky. Then, when the duo pulled on long-sleeved T-shirts to stay warm in the mid-60-degree London weather, they were criticized for not showing enough skin. To maker matters worse, photographers on the sidelines seem to have wandering eyes, as photos of the backsides of bikini-clad women volleyball players have been cluttering stock photo websites such as Getty Images. In a response to the degrading images—which often leave out the heads of the volleyball players—Metro.com suggestively cropped photos of male athletes to show what it would be like if all Olympic sports were captured in this objectifying way.


 For the coverage of the women gymnasts. Here are some ways these awesome athletes’ accomplishments have been trivialized:

  • Gabby Douglas’ Hair: Even though 16-year-old gymnast Gabby Douglas has qualified for the all-around competition and had an outstanding performance that helped the U.S. women’s team win the gold medal, some on the Internet criticized her hair rather than celebrating her achievements. Fortunately, bloggers such as Monisha Randolph on Sporty Afros responded  to Douglas’ critics by reminding them what’s really important about a woman athlete.
  • “Divas” and “Girls”: In an attempt to dramatize the Olympics further (as if the athletic performances weren’t enough!), NBC has taken to calling the Russian women gymnasts “divas.” The commentators also call the women gymnasts “girls” and emphasize their “girlish” behavior. These terms diminish and infantilize the young women’s strength and skills.
  • Team Rivalry: Throughout its coverage of women’s gymnastics, NBC has stuck with a narrative stressing the U.S. women’s “rivalry.” During the competition to earn one of two slots in the individual all-around finals, in which Jordyn Wieber was beaten out by her teammate Aly Raisman, NBC’s often showed the women in the same frame with Raisman grinning and Wieber crying, thus pitting them against each other (rather than against there own individual aspirations). There seems to be a disturbing trend of drama-centered Olympic coverage.

 For Michelle Obama, delegate for the U.S., who has been spotted at various Olympic events in support of the American athletes. But we want to especially thumbs-up the love she’s been showing to the female Olympians: This past Saturday the First Lady cheered on Serena Williams in her opening match against Jelena Jankovic and, when she met wrestler Elena Pirozhkova, allowed the athlete to show off her strength by picking the First Lady up.

 For Ye Shiwen’s gold medal finishes in the 200m and 400m individual medley. But …

 

 For the immediate accusations that her accomplishments were the result of doping. After the 16-year-old swimmer beat Ryan Lochte’s time in her last 50-meter freestyle split during the 400m individual medley on Saturday, U.S. swimmers, coaches and commentators alike hinted that her success may not be built on sweat and blood alone. Yes, the Chinese had a history of doping in the 1990s, but Shiwen trains with coaches in Australia. Unless tests prove otherwise, she should be celebrated for her prowess. The Olympic authorities defend Shiwen here.

 For Missy Franklin’s gold medal in the 100-meter backstroke Monday. Incredibly, she had less than 15 minutes  between the 200-meter freestyle semi-final and her gold medal swim.

Finally, we’re still in awe of the U.S. Women’s gymnastics team’s gold medal performance Tuesday night in the team final, and Gabby Douglas’ gold medal win in the all-around competition. Douglas is the first black woman to win the all-around title. You go, young women!

Compiled and written by Dana Shaker, Anna Diamond and Christine Parker.
Originally posted on the Ms. blog.

Photo of U.S. beach volleyball players Kerri Walsh Jennings and Misty May-Treanor and featured photo of London 2012 logo under Wikimedia Commons.

High-Ranking Catholic Clergyman Convicted!

After a three-month trial, Monsignor William Lynn of Philadelphia has been found guilty of one count of endangering children in the archdiocese for which he served as secretary of clergy from 1992 to 2004. The jury was shown evidence that Lynn had concealed reports of alleged sexual abuse by priests and had not acted strongly to keep molesters away from children, nor did he report suspected abusers to criminal authorities. Lynn was acquitted of a second endangerment count and a third count, of conspiracy.

Lynn is now the first senior church official to be convicted of a cover-up in the priest sexual abuse scandals that have rocked the Catholic Church over the last 10 years. He faces 3 1/2 to 7 years in prison.

The monsignor was prosecuted along with Rev. James Brennan, but the jury deadlocked on a verdict and a mistrial was declared. Brennan was accused of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old boy.

Those who have worked hard to bring abusing priests to justice are heartened by the decision, and hope it empowers prosecutors in other locales to take action against church higher-ups who failed to stem sexual abuse. Barbara Dorris of SNAP (Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests), told The New York Times:

The guilty verdict sends a strong and clear message that shielding and enabling predator priests is a heinous crime that threatens families, communities and children, and must be punished as such.

For more on the case and its outcome, see here and here.

Photo of statue holding scales of justice, Adelaide, Australia, from Flickr user mikecogh under license from Creative Commons 2.0

 

Komen and the Dangers of Corporate-Funded Causes

By Mara Einstein

Breast-cancer charity Susan G. Komen’s decision to pull funding from Planned Parenthood–an organization that provides subsidized breast cancer exams for lower-income women–leaves me scratching my head.

Komen claims to be withholding funds because of new criteria barring it from providing grants to organizations that are under investigation by local, state or federal authorities. In and of itself, that is odd. What is stranger, however, is the 2011 hiring of Karen Handel–who was openly anti-Planned Parenthood–to the position of Senior Vice President of Public Policy for the organization. And, adding to an already questionable management decision, Komen put her in the position to establish their foundation’s policy.

They must have had a reason for hiring her. I can’t imagine what it was, though.

However, the organization has been confronted with anti-abortion pressure before, but not given in. So why cave now? What’s different beyond change in management?

The likely answer: money.

Susan G. Komen is funded, as you probably know, through numerous relationships with consumer brand companies. Come October we are swathed in pink thanks to Komen’s partnerships with Coca Cola (its “Minute Maid Pink Lemonade”), Yoplait (“Save Lids Save Lives”) and dozens of other companies making everything from pink hand tools (who doesn’t love a powder pink power drill?) to Tory Burch puffer jackets. Their sponsors are multinational corporations who have tied in with Komen to show affinity with women—the primary purchasers of their products.

I suspect that not only anti-abortion factions, but also corporate sponsors, pressured Komen. Nothing causes a business to stop in its tracks faster than the fear of a) losing money, and b) bad publicity. It is not that anti-choicers have so much influence on Komen; it’s that they can have so much influence on Komen’s sponsors.

As I write in my forthcoming book, Compassion, Inc.: How Corporate America Blurs the Line Between What We By, Who We Are and Those We Help (University of California Press, April), corporate funding of social causes via product purchases has been increasing at a disquieting rate. Called cause marketing, cause-related marketing or sometimes “corporate social responsibility,” these campaigns allow corporations to back social issues from women’s health to education to sustainability.

While these campaigns can do good, there are also considerable downsides to using the consumer marketplace to fund nonprofits. Beyond making people feel that purchasing say, a pink product, can replace a direct donation, the wider concern is the impact on the system of nonprofit funding. For example, if a campaign does not work to drive sales, the corporate sponsor can drop one non-profit for another that might be more beneficial to its bottom line. Conversely, any negative press connected to a corporation can reflect badly on the charity and hurt its donations. Perhaps most disturbing is that corporations support “female friendly” non-controversial causes like education, poverty and homelessness, and health (heart health in the form of red dresses and breast cancer in the form of pink ribbons) while eschewing controversial ones (Planned Parenthood) or ones that can’t be made visually appealing (like Alzheimer’s disease). In this instance, corporations may have become concerned about Komen’s connection to Planned Parenthood. Anti-choicers have grown increasingly savvy in using online petitions and social media to warn corporations away from reproductive-rights causes.

Thankfully, social media works both ways. You, too, can tell corporate sponsors that you will pull your business if they support Komen’s decision. You can go to Credo and sign the petition. You can tweet and retweet support for funding of Planned Parenthood under the hashtags #standwithPP and #occupythecure. I assure you corporate sponsors will get the message.

In the end, this snafu should be filed under “unintended consequences” because Joan Walsh of Salon.com got it right: Komen has fundamentally hurt their brand—the heart and soul of their business. This might not be a brand mistake on the magnitude of New Coke—particularly if they reverse their decision—but it isn’t too far from it given the current activity on Twitter about Komen. If they don’t reverse course, I suspect there will a whole lot fewer Yoplait lids licked next fall.

Cross-posted from the Ms. Blog

Photo from Flickr user WeNews under Creative Commons 2.0.

Finally, Finally! FBI’s “Forcible Rape” Definition Is Officially History

 

By Annie Shields

Last month we reported that victory was in sight in our months-long Rape is Rape campaign. At a December Senate hearing, FBI Director Robert Mueller let slip that “sometime this spring” the agency would update its archaic definition of “forcible rape.”

Mueller’s prediction gave us reason for optimism, but an official announcement today from the Obama administration gave us reason to celebrate!

The AP reports:

In a press briefing, senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett called the change a “very, very important step” because it counts men and because it includes rapes of women other than by physical force.

In the FBI’s official statement, CJIS Assistant Director David Cuthbertson says that the update ensures that “the number of victims of this heinous crime will be more accurately reflected in national crime statistics.”

“Updating the FBI Uniform Crime Report definition of rape is a big win for women,” said FMF president Ellie Smeal. “We appreciate the support for this change from the Obama Administration, led by Vice President Joe Biden and by Lynn Rosenthal, White House Advisor on Violence Against Women, and Hon. Susan B. Carbon, director of the Office on Violence Against Women in the Department of Justice.”

“This is a major policy change and will dramatically impact the way rape is tracked and reported nationwide,” says Katherine Spillar, executive editor of Ms. “With a modern, broader definition, FBI Uniform Crime Report statistics will finally show the true breadth of this violence that affects so many women’s lives.”

If you’re a regular reader, chances are you’ve been following our campaign since its launch in our Spring 2011 issue, and are as relieved and satisfied as we are. Eight months may seem like a long campaign, but for a federal agency this change practically happened overnight. The speed with which the new definition was adopted was due in no small part to the more than 160,000 people who signed on to the campaign. Thanks to all those who participated in this revolutionary effort to make sure that all rapes are counted!

And if you’d like to take a minute to thank FBI Director Robert Mueller for finally taking the archaic “forcible rape” definition off the books and into the history books where it belongs, you can do so here.

Cross-posted with permission from the Ms. Blog.

So Sorry, Rachel, There Is Still Sexual Harassment

By Joan Grey

To my dear granddaughter Rachel,

At less than a year old, you are a bit young to hear this message. The immediate challenges ahead of you include walking and talking. But this is one of those topics that there is never really a good time to discuss. While I hope you never experience this, forewarned is forearmed. What I need to tell you about is harassment and violence, particularly against women and girls.

Harassment starts young. A recently released survey from the American Association of University Women (AAUW),Crossing the Line: Sexual Harassment at School, concludes that sexual harassment is commonplace in middle and high schools. Nearly half of students experienced some form of sexual harassment during the recent school year, with girls more likely than boys to be sexually harassed. Technology has extended harassment’s reach, with texting, email, and Facebook providing new ways to attack others.

More than half of students have viewed sexual harassment of others. Witnessing it is not as bad as being the target, but it makes school feel less safe.

So, what is harassment? Harassment is a form of hostility—sometimes subtle and other times blatant. It can run the gamut from teasing to physical contact. Often it entails offensive remarks about a person’s gender. Verbal, visual or physical conduct of a sexual nature may be sexual harassment, if the behavior is unwelcome. Unwelcome is the critical word.

I wish I could say that harassment will stop after you graduate school, especially since there are laws that are supposed to protect against workplace sexual harassment. But even so, and after years of high-profile discussions and education programs, workplace sexual harassment of women and men is sadly alive and well. The Business and Professional Women’s (BPW) Foundation report, From Gen Y Women to Employers: What They Want in the Workplace and Why it Matters for Business [PDF], lists the most prevalent forms of gender discrimination seen by young working women:

  • Stereotyping (63 percent)
  • Unequal compensation (60%)
  • Not being treated as an equal (58%)
  • Inequality of opportunities (52%)
  • Being held to a different standard (51%)
  • Sexist jokes and derogatory statements about women (38%)

So what can you do if you encounter a situation of sexual harassment? Say “no” clearly when you encounter a behavior that feels inappropriate. It may be something that you just sense is “not quite right”–honor that intuition. Second, report the encounter to a trusted person like your parents or a teacher. This is not a secret to keep to yourself, even if it feels scary or embarrassing to talk about. Let others help you decide what to do. Being prepared will make you more confident.

It breaks my heart to tell you that, despite all the strides women have made, you will likely still face harassment. At this time in your life, when you don’t even know about the difference between boys and girls, our intention is to raise you to think girls can do anything they want, while still trying to make the world more equitable for all. I can only hope that, with your help, tomorrow will be different.

Love,

GG

Photo from Flickr user JonRawlinson under Creative Commons 2.0.

Part of the #HERvotes blog carnival.

 

Correct. Protect. Respect. Promoting Economic Security with Safe Workplaces

By Donna Addkison
President/CEO
Wider Opportunities for Women


Women work. A lot of women work, making up 47% of the American workforce today. Two out three do so to provide the sole or a substantial part of a household income.  Yet women in the workforce continue to be the targets of unwanted, unwelcome sexual harassment in the workplace.  While the EEOC  handles 10-12,000 cases every year, we know this is just the tip of the iceberg. Sexual harrassment threatens women’s ability to provide financial support and economic security for themselves and for their families.

Ever heard the story of the woman on the road as a corporate trainer who had company salesmen appear at her hotel door in the nude?  Or the one about the mid-level manager with a boss who continued to ask her out again and again and again in spite of her saying no?  And the one about the woman working in construction who was subjected to physical intimidation along with the more subtle forms like ‘pin-ups’ of naked and nearly naked women in the onsite office?  Probably not – estimates suggest that only 5-15% of incidents of sexual harassment are reported.

Why?  The answers are as simple as they are complex.  When your paycheck puts a roof over your family, food on the table, and gas in the car, how do you take on the bad behavior of those who have some level of authority over your work life?  Do women sacrifice their jobs or their dignity?  Or both?

While women struggle to get a strong foothold in industries and careers with good pay and benefits, they often face the specter of sexual harassment in the workplace.  How many women do you know who have their own stories to tell?  How many mothers, sisters, and daughters have faced or fallen victim to sexual harassment?  How many is enough?

Men and women – both bring value to the workforce.  Let’s create safe working environments where men and women are respected at work, protected from sexual harassment, and afforded opportunities to climb career ladders that lead to economic security for themselves and for those who depend on them.


Part of the #HERvotes blog carnival.

>

We must end the filibuster and put the ERA in the US Constitution! Give Now