Gender

Subterms

    More stories

    • 313 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump is tearing up the rights of women. The message from your sisters in the Arab world? Don’t give up: resistance works | Hibaaq Osman

      by

      From outside the US looking in, those of us who have experienced the tumultuous years since the Arab revolutions feel a strange sense of familiarity: the chaos of the Trump-Musk administration, the attacks on minority groups, the elevation of men – a number of whom have been accused of violence against women – to cabinet positions.Trump seems to have started his second term with the same ferocity, callousness, violence and ignominy in which his first term so notoriously ended. Amid the shock of the past few weeks, a sense of panic can be immobilising. But that is exactly what such a strategy is designed to do.For women in the US who now feel under attack like never before, who sense their rights, even their bodily autonomy, slipping through their fingers, I bid a weary but warm welcome to the club. You must know that you do not need to look far for solidarity. There are women in the US who have had to fight every step of the way to have their humanity recognised by a bigoted and over-mighty state. African American women, Indigenous American women, Latin American women – their civil rights struggles have been extraordinary and hugely influential across the world.But if I may, there are many examples to be shared of women in the Arab world who have taken on the laws, institutions and cultures of oppression that mired their daily lives – and won.With some US politicians now looking to bar women from seeking an abortion beyond state lines, you can take inspiration from the women of Libya. Twice now, the Libyan authorities have declared their intention to ban women from independent travel without a male “guardian”. Female activists met these proposals with campaigns that raised global attention and condemnation, exerting political and diplomatic pressure that resulted in the proposals being rescinded.That this is possible in a country in which decades of dictatorship and conflict have prevented the establishment of a democratic culture shows the power of women organising together in grassroots advocacy. Even when the levers of power are not accessible directly, there is still huge power in working together strategically.When women in Jordan and Lebanon started work on addressing colonial-era laws that meant convicted rapists could escape punishment by agreeing to marry their victim, there were not many female parliamentarians they could find to champion their cause in the corridors of power. So they found other means. On social media, they developed hugely creative campaigns. Through this activism, women’s groups built coalitions that put the issue on the political agenda, with the laws abolished in both countries within days of each other.Such laws – which could still be found on the statute book in France as late as the 1990s – are based on an all-too-common belief that it is more shameful to be the victim of rape than it is to be the perpetrator. The work in Jordan and Lebanon then finds a haunting echo in the amazing courage shown last year by Gisèle Pelicot. Her case emphasises that while legal or constitutional changes are vital, the more difficult but fundamental task is to change a culture that allows such violence and discrimination to be conceived and committed at all.It makes me think of the incredible work going on in Egypt led by my colleagues reaching out to religious leaders. Over years, these activists have brought imams to engage with a study on women’s rights, gradually overcoming resistance and demonstrating compatibility with their faith.Some leaders went further, using the study in sermons and advocating for policies such as criminalising early marriage. That work has required incredible patience, persistence and compassion. It takes a lot to understand where people are coming from and to build a platform for respectful conversation, all without ceding ground or your own principles. But it can be done.Such a task of dealing with, and challenging, deeply held beliefs faces women in the US.American women did not suddenly wake up one morning to find sexual abusers in the White House. The path to this point has been long and ignominious. If things are to change for the better, the road ahead is equally long and challenging – but women can lead the way. There will be missteps, there will be failures. But nothing at all will be achieved if those disgusted and enraged by this state of affairs choose to sit back.The triumphs I have witnessed have been the fruit of years of hard work, of determination, of people being prepared to take risks. The stakes in the US show the time for playing it safe is long gone. This is a time to make noise, to find strength in solidarity and being part of a movement.The Trump administration threatens not only the health and rights of women within the US, but the progress that women have made globally. His cuts to American development, humanitarian and medical aid overseas are already having devastating consequences for women and girls facing violence, armed conflict, disaster and disease. And by cosying up to regimes notorious for perpetrating organised gender-based violence, he threatens decades of work to address the impact of conflict on women and girls.In this fight, women across the world are with our US sisters. Our cause is one – it has always been. To stand up against the injustice and inequality you see is an awesome challenge, but it is not one you are facing alone. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      UN human rights chief ‘deeply worried by fundamental shift’ in US

      by

      The UN human rights chief has warned of a “fundamental shift” in the US and sounded the alarm over the growing power of “unelected tech oligarchs”, in a stinging rebuke of Washington weeks into Donald Trump’s presidency.Volker Türk said there had been bipartisan support for human rights in the US for decades but said he was “now deeply worried by the fundamental shift in direction that is taking place domestically and internationally”.Without referring to Trump by name, Türk, an Austrian lawyer who heads the UN’s rights body, criticised the Republican president’s measures to overturn longstanding equity and anti-discrimination policies, as well as repeated threats against the media and politicians.“In a paradoxical mirror image, policies intended to protect people from discrimination are now labelled as discriminatory. Progress is being rolled back on gender equality,” Türk said in comments to the UN human rights council in Geneva.“Disinformation, intimidation and threats, notably against journalists and public officials, risk undermining the work of independent media and the functioning of institutions,” he added. “Divisive rhetoric is being used to distort, deceive and polarise. This is generating fear and anxiety among many.”Since returning to power, Trump has continued to attack the press. Last month, he barred the Associated Press news agency – on which local and international media have traditionally relied for US government reporting – from the White House.His administration has launched a purge of anti-discrimination policies under the umbrella term of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), and moved to slash rights for transgender people. At the same time, the administration has sent panic through communities with its widespread and muddled immigration crackdown.Internationally, the US has moved to withdraw funding for international organisations that promote health and human rights, such as the World Health Organization, and imposed economic sanctions on the international criminal court, which is investigating war crimes in Gaza.Washington’s traditional allies, including Canada, France and Germany, are feeling increasingly alarmed as Trump lashes out at democratic leaders while expressing a fondness for autocrats, including the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.In his speech on Monday, Türk presented a concerned overview of the global rights situation, saying the world was “going through a period of turbulence and unpredictability”.“[What] we are experiencing goes to the very core of the international order – an order that has brought us an unprecedented level of global stability. We cannot allow the fundamental global consensus around international norms and institutions, built painstakingly over decades, to crumble before our eyes.”He called out the growing influence wielded by “a handful of unelected tech oligarchs” who “have our data: they know where we live, what we do, our genes and our health conditions, our thoughts, our habits, our desires and our fears”.Türk added: “They know how to manipulate us.”While his comments were not directed at the US, they come at a time of rising and consolidated power among American tech and social media billionaires who have fallen in line behind Trump.They include Elon Musk, who owns X and has been the 78-year-old president’s most prominent backer, but also Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, who has ended factchecking programmes on Facebook and Instagram – a move the UN chief, António Guterres, has warned will open the “floodgates to more hate, more threats, and more violence”.Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, the world’s third-richest man and owner of the Washington Post, which in the last US presidential election declined to endorse a candidate for the first time in decades, recently banned opinion articles that did not support his views on “personal liberties and free markets”.Türk, whose comments were not limited to the situation in the US but could also apply to tech leaders in China and India, said that “any form of unregulated power can lead to oppression, subjugation, and even tyranny – the playbook of the autocrat”. More

    • 63 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Transgender Rights Are Human Rights

      by

      More from our inbox:‘I Am So Sorry’Lying to ChildrenThe Education Department said it would investigate two colleges that have been caught up in disputes regarding transgender athletes.Demetrius Freeman/ReutersTo the Editor:Re “Pain Is the Point of Trump’s Transgender Policy,” by Jennifer Finney Boylan (Opinion guest essay, Feb. 18):For most of my life I feared what would happen if anyone knew that I experienced a full spectrum of both feminine and masculine expressions. The shame began when I was a small child and followed me throughout much of my life. Even so I did not grow up with a fear of my government. America was a work in progress.I have seen rights gradually extended to women, racial minorities and sexual minorities, including trans and nonbinary people. However, today I find myself joining the rapidly growing ranks of innocent Americans who get up each morning fearing their own government.By targeting trans and nonbinary people, our president seeks to secure unchecked power at the expense of the vulnerable and innocent. Scapegoating minorities is a tried and true model for dictators throughout history. Here President Trump joins the likes of Vladimir Putin and Viktor Orban by manufacturing a perceived threat from an innocent minority, which will eventually justify restrictions on civil rights for everyone.I have listened to his calls for a return to a time when there were only two genders. That was also a time when America freely and openly discriminated against women, people of color, Jews and others. The fact is there have never been just two genders. Many societies accepted us, and even those that tried to ban us recognized our existence in those very bans.We will not disappear again into the shadows. We will resist, those who love us will resist, and those who are decent will resist. As long as we do so, the ideal that all Americans are created equal will not fade, that this country might endure and grow once again.Mark PetersenPark City, UtahTo the Editor:Re “Trump’s Shameful Campaign Against Transgender Americans” (editorial, Feb. 16):The Trump administration’s attacks on transgender and nonbinary individuals compromise our safety and attempt to strip us of our rights and our humanity. These policies aren’t just cruel — they are also deeply un-American.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Even rightwingers are mocking the ‘Epstein files’ as a lot of redacted nothing

      by

      The Epstein files fiascoDrum roll, please: the “most transparent administration in American history” is declassifying shocking new information about Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. After years of speculation that powerful people have been concealing information related to the late financier and convicted sex offender, the Trump administration said earlier this week that it would release unseen details about the case.“Breaking news right now, you’re going to see some Epstein information being released by my office,” Pam Bondi, the attorney general, told Fox News on Wednesday night. “This will make you sick.”Apparently intent on treating this “new” Epstein information like an album drop rather than a horrific sex-trafficking case involving the abuse of young girls, the White House gave a bunch of influencers a first look at the information. On Thursday, Bondi’s team handed out big white binders labelled “The Epstein Files: Phase 1” and “The Most Transparent Administration in History” to a group of 15 rightwing activists and self-styled “citizen journalists” visiting the White House. Grinning gleefully, these influencers proceeded to pose for the press with the binders like they were trophies from a school sports day.So what was in those binders? A whole lot of heavily redacted nothing, basically. A bunch of people at Bondi’s office appear to have hastily printed out Epstein’s contact book, which was published by the (now shuttered) website Gawker a decade ago, along with other information that has been in the public domain for years. They then shoved 200 pages of printouts into binders and gave them to a handpicked collection of useful idiots. Being as they’re the most transparent administration in American history, the justice department also made the information available on its website later that day – along with a note acknowledging that there wasn’t actually much to see. “The first phase of declassified files largely contains documents that have been previously leaked but never released in a formal capacity by the U.S. Government,” the note said.“This isn’t a news story, it’s a publicity stunt,” the Palm Beach lawyer Spencer Kuvin, who has worked on the case since 2005, representing nine victims, told the Miami Herald. He added that he feared that the Trump administration was using Epstein’s victims for political purposes. But then what do you expect from Trump – a guy who, in 2002 said of Epstein: “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It’s even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do. And many of them are on the younger side.”In short, this whole big “reveal” was an embarrassing flop – so much so that it was mocked by people on the right. Even Laura Loomer, a white nationalist conspiracy theorist, thought the stunt was distasteful.“I hate to say it, but the American people can’t trust the validity of the Epstein files released today. It was released in an unprofessional manner with paid, partisan social media influencers to curate their binders for us,” Loomer tweeted on Thursday. She later added: “Sorry I won’t celebrate dancing like a school girl with a binder full of pedophile names.” When even Loomer thinks you’ve gone low, you’ve gone very low indeed.Ultimately, however, while nothing new may have been revealed in Bondi’s “Epstein files”, this grotesque stunt was very revealing. It was yet another reminder that there is nothing – not even the sex trafficking of minors – that Donald Trump and his associates won’t cynically turn into a self-serving photo opportunity. Or, I should add, an opportunity to “Rickroll” people: midday Thursday, while people were waiting for the documents to be published online, the House judiciary GOP account on X posted in all-caps: “#BREAKING: EPSTEIN FILES RELEASED.” This then redirected users to the YouTube music video for Rick Astley’s 1987 hit Never Gonna Give You Up. Classy.Also revealing was who the White House thought should get a first look at documents involving sex trafficking. Among the influencers assembled was Mike Cernovich. Who is he? Just a rightwing manosphere influencer who has said things like “rape via an alpha male is different from other forms of rape” and told men that women exist “for your sexual pleasure”.The reaction to the backlash over the Epstein files fiasco also shows how, when anything goes wrong, people in Trump’s orbit are quick to point fingers and turn on each other rather than take responsibility. Bondi, for example, responded to all the criticism by accusing the FBI of withholding information from her. Meanwhile, some of the conservative influencers who got the binders full of nothing accused the southern district of New York of hiding information.“These swamp creatures at SDNY deceived Bondi, Kash, and YOU,” the conservative media personality Liz Wheeler tweeted. “Be outraged that the binder is boring. You should be. Because the evil deep state LIED TO YOUR FACE.”Perhaps what is most revealing about this fiasco, however, is that it is a stark reminder of how justice still hasn’t been served when it comes to Epstein’s many victims. Apart from Ghislaine Maxwell, none of Epstein’s many enablers and associates have faced any real consequences. A lot of rich and powerful people have got away with disgraceful things. And that’s not a conspiracy theory; that’s just our legal system.Andrew Tate and brother land in US from Romania after travel ban liftedSpeaking of predators evading accountability, the Tate brothers, who are charged with human trafficking in Romania, landed in the US on Thursday. This comes after it was reported last week that the Trump administration had asked Romanian authorities to lift travel restrictions on the pair.View image in fullscreen‘Pro-lifers’ are demanding women face the death penaltySelf-described “abortion abolitionists” – who oppose all abortions without any exceptions and want to criminalize the procedure and ban IVF – used to be at the fringes of the anti-abortion movement. Now, people who believe that the death penalty should be considered for women who have abortions are slowly moving into the US mainstream. Mother Jones looks at how some of these abolitionist men have turned on women in the anti-abortion movement. “We need Christian men leading the fight against abortion, not feminist women,” one of those “TheoBros” recently wrote.At least six children die of hypothermia amid freezing conditions in GazaI haven’t heard any pro-lifers get upset about this.Jeff Bezos is sending Katy Perry to spaceLast year, Perry came out with Woman’s World, her first solo single in three years and, she said, “the first contribution I have given since becoming a mother and since feeling really connected to my feminine divine”. Unfortunately, her contribution was panned so mercilessly that Perry is now taking her feminine divine as far away from the world as possible: the singer will fly to space during Blue Origin’s next (all-female) crewed mission, the Jeff Bezos-owned space company has announced. Rumour has it that if you work at the Washington Post and have any opinions that have the temerity to clash with Bezos’s, then you’ll get shot into space, too.The pill hasn’t been improved in years – no wonder women are giving up on itMisinformation from wellness influencers along with a conservative backlash against birth control is causing more people to stop taking the pill. “But there’s another, underlying problem when it comes to contraception,” writes Martha Gill. “It needs to improve … It’s common for women to be using the same methods as their mothers – or even their grandmothers. Why aren’t contraceptives getting better?”The week in porktriarchyBig news for anyone with a small child: Peppa Pig’s mother (Mummy Pig) is having a new little piglet. Not sure how they can afford three children in this day and age but maybe Mummy Pig has been trading meme coins. While I’m sure Elon “have more babies” Musk is thrilled by the baby announcement, it is not clear how Cardi B feels. The rapper has been in a feud with Peppa since 2020, ever since her daughter started ruining her Uggs by jumping in muddy puddles. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump is unleashing anti-trans hysteria onto the world | Moira Donegan

      by

      In the video, she sounds exasperated. Hunter Schafer, a 26-year-old actor best known for her roles on the HBO series Euphoria and in the Hunger Games film The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, appeared in an eight-minute video last Friday in which she revealed that due to a Trump administration order, she had been assigned a passport with the gender marker “male”.Schafer, who is trans, began living as a girl in her early teens; she has lived as a woman for her entire adult life. In her video, she says that her IDs have been marked “female” for just about as long as she has had them. But after her passport was stolen in a car break-in in Barcelona, she has been issued a government identity document that represents a fiction that she is a man. Every time she travels now, she will have to present this document, she will have to account for the discrepancy between what it says about her, and what she clearly is.In her video, Schafer stresses her own privilege: for her, the incorrect passport is not a matter of life and death. But the harm to dignity that the new document will impose on her will be repeated, intimate and needless. It is an exercise in cruelty that the Trump administration has declared that official documents, like passports, will no longer reflect these basic realities of trans people’s lives. It is also a brute assertion of the Trump administration’s claim to control over reality itself: a way for them to make a lie into an official truth.Schafer is right that many trans Americans will fare even worse than she will. In a flurry of executive actions in their first days in office, the Trump regime issued a rapid flurry of anti-trans executive orders. They banned trans servicemembers from the military; the Pentagon is now moving to fire them all. They barred trans women and girls from participating in sports, and the NCAA promptly complied, throwing athletes off their teams in a reversal of 15 years of policy. They ordered that trans people not be granted equal access to housing and shelters, and Trump’s Housing and Urban Development department promptly stopped enforcing civil rights rules.They issued an order banning transition-related care for young people – people like the teenager Schafer had been when she began transitioning – and a number of hospitals and clinics canceled appointments, leaving often desperate patients with no way to get care. And this week, the Trump state department announced that it would deny visas for transgender athletes coming from abroad to compete in the United States before the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics – a move that also seems designed to allow them to deny all visas to trans travelers. This rapid mobilization across vastly different sectors of the law will have immediate and far-reaching results. It will ruin lives.The Trump administration and the broader revanchist movement are targeting trans people because they are a tiny minority that they think can be bullied and dehumanized without great political pushback. They are targeting trans people because trans life represents the principles of dignity, self-determination and gender equality that they abhor. And they are targeting trans people because they are hateful, sadistic and cruel – because they want to make people suffer for the crime of being different from them, and because they do not have the courage to pick on anyone who is more capable of fighting back.But the anti-trans sadism of the new Trump administration should not only offend us because it is cruel. It should offend us because it demands that government departments, federally funded institutions, and the people who work for them participate in a lie: that trans people are not who they say they are.Transphobes like those in the Trump administration have long smugly declared themselves the arbiters of the “truth” about gender – that it is fixed, that there are two, that gender is merely a brute fact of the body that cannot be changed, and that nothing that happens to a person after their sex is assigned at birth has any bearing on the truth of what their gender is. They have declared this with immense self-satisfaction; they have declared themselves rational, and intelligent, and even brave for saying it.But the gender marker on Hunter Schafer’s passport is not true; it represents a lie, an assertion in total contradiction not only to how she sees herself, but to how everyone else sees her, to the reality of how she lives her life. Every trans person who is issued a wrong document is coerced into this same lie; every other person, cisgender or not, who has to work with these documents and in deference to these policies is coerced into a lie, too. We are told that what we see and feel and experience of trans people does not count, that we should not believe our lying eyes. We are told that no official body of the federal government will accept the plain and obvious truth.Anti-trans hysteria, then, should be understood as a function of the Trump administration’s epistemic violence, its mission to make lies into policy and to suppress truth. It is as much of a lie that Hunter Schafer is a man as it is that Donald Trump won the 2020 election, or that vaccines cause autism, or that climate change isn’t real. There is a moral case to be made for resistance to these orders, but there is also an intellectual one. We do not have to be as stupid, in the face of trans existence, as the Trump administration demands that we be. We do not have to pretend not to know things that we do.

      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 213 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Saying ‘women’ is not allowed, but ‘men’ and ‘white’ are OK? I’m (not) shocked | Arwa Mahdawi

      by

      From banning books to policing wordsThanks to the intolerant left, nobody can say the word “women” anymore! Do you remember when that was a major talking point in certain quarters? Prominent columnists wrote endless pieces declaring that the word “women” had “become verboten”. The thought police, these people claimed, were forcing everyone to say “bodies with vaginas” and “menstruators” instead. Even the likes of Margaret Atwood tweeted articles with headlines like: “Why can’t we say ‘woman’ anymore?”That, of course, was complete nonsense. While there was certainly a push for more inclusive language, nobody with any influence was trying to ban the word “women”.Now, however? Now, it’s a very different story. Thanks to Donald Trump’s sweeping executive orders attacking “gender ideology” and DEI programs, the word “women” – along with a number of other terms – is quite literally being erased. The likes of Nasa have been busy scrubbing mentions of terms related to women in leadership from public websites in an attempt to comply with Trump’s executive orders, for example. Agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have taken down numerous webpages related to gender in the wake of Trump’s orders – although a federal judged ordered on Tuesday that they should be reinstated.Meanwhile, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has an internal list of hot-button words (which include “women”, “gender”, “minority”, “biases”) that they are cross-referencing against active research projects and grant applications. The Washington Post reports that once one of these very dangerous words is identified, staff then have to go through a flowchart to see whether a research project should be flagged for further review.The National Institutes of Health and multiple university research departments are going through a similar dystopian exercise. Researchers at the University of California at San Diego, for example, have said their work is now at risk if it contains language deemed potentially problematic, including the word “women”.Rebecca Fielding-Miller, a UCSD public health scientist, told KPBS that the list of banned words circling in scientific communities was Orwellian and would hamper important research. “If I can’t say the word ‘women,’ I can’t tell you that an abortion ban is going to hurt women,” Fielding-Miller said.Fielding-Miller also noted that it was illuminating to see which words hadn’t been flagged as problematic. “I guess a word that’s not on here is ‘men’, and I guess a word that I don’t see on here is ‘white’, so I guess we’ll see what’s going on with white men and what they need,” Fielding-Miller added.Amid all the anxiety about what you are allowed to say in this brave new world, a lot of researchers are erring on the side of caution. Some scientists have said that they are considering self-censoring to improve their chances of getting grants. Others are gravitating towards “safe” topics – like, you know, issues that concern white men. This is a dance we’ve seen many times before: Republicans will advance ambiguous, and possibly unconstitutional, legislation. Because no one knows what the hell is going on or how they might get punished for violating these vague new laws, people self-censor and aggressively police themselves.So, I guess this is where we are now: Republicans aren’t just banning books, they’re policing words. An administration effectively fronted by Elon Musk – a self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist” – is so touchy about the language that we use that scientists are now self-censoring. It’s so prescriptive about what things are called that it’s blocking journalists from events for continuing to refer to the Gulf of Mexico instead of the Gulf of America. It’s so obsessed with controlling how we think that it’s erasing references to trans people from the website for the Stonewall national monument. Under the disingenuous guise of “restoring freedom of speech”, the Trump administration has made clear it is intent on controlling the very words we use.Errol Musk, who impregnated his former stepdaughter, says Elon is a bad dadElon Musk seems to get some of his extreme views about pro-natalism from his father, Errol, who also has multiple children. Errol has even fathered two kids with his former stepdaughter, who was only four years old when he married her mother. I bring this up because Errol is currently in the news calling Elon a terrible father. He’s certainly not wrong about that – the Tesla billionaire seems to treat his kids like props rather than people – but his statements bring to mind certain adages about pots and kettles as well as glass houses.Investigation launched into human egg trafficking ringThailand and Georgia have said they are investigating a human-trafficking ring accused of harvesting human eggs from Thai women who came to Georgia thinking they’d be surrogates. Instead, they were reportedly held captive and had their eggs harvested. This story is just the latest example of the way in which the global egg trade has given rise to black markets and abuse. Last year, for example, a Bloomberg Businessweek investigation reported that Greek police had identified up to 75 cases of alleged theft of eggs taken from the ovaries of IVF patients at a clinic on Crete.Infant mortality rates rise in US states with abortion bans, study findsJust your latest reminder that anti-abortion activists are in no way “pro-life”.Domestic violence study that strangled rats should not have been approved, animal advocates argueThe rats were non-fatally strangled as part of research that aimed to improve the detection of brain injury resulting from intimate partner violence.The Syrian feminists who forged a new world in a land of warThe Guardian has a fascinating piece on the autonomous region of Rojava, in north-eastern Syria, which has a government with arguably the most complete gender equality in the world.A pregnant woman in the West Bank was shot by Israeli soldiersSondos Shalabi, 23, was eight months pregnant. Her killing comes as Israeli settlers are unofficially annexing large areas of the occupied West Bank and escalating violence has displaced around 40,000 Palestinians. The West Bank is becoming another Gaza.How Sasha DiGiulian broke climbing’s glass ceilingThe big-wall climber talks to the Guardian about sexism in climbing – including a tendency for routes that women have climbed getting “immediately downgraded by male climbers”.The ‘puppygirl hacker polycule’ leaks numerous police filesThe group told the Daily Dot there are not “enough hacks against the police”, adding: “So we took matters into our own paws.”The week in pawtriarchyPalmerston is a black-and-white cat who was – until recently – retired after a long and distinguished career as chief mouser for the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London. The “DiploMog” has emerged from retirement to start work work as feline relations consultant to the new governor of Bermuda. If only the US would learn from this: government needs more cats and fewer Doges. More

    • 113 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      How Trump made ‘diversity’ a dirty word – podcast

      by

      In the immediate aftermath of January’s Potomac River tragedy, the deadliest US air disaster since 9/11, few might have expected Donald Trump to point so quickly to one alleged culprit: DEI policies. But as the Guardian US reporter Lauren Aratani explains, Trump’s comments were just the latest chapter in the long fight against diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.Lauren tells Helen Pidd that DEI policies were born in the 1960s as part of an effort by employers to broadly address injustice and exclusion. Today they are based on actively considering a person’s identity (race, gender, sexuality, disability, class etc) when engaging with them, and they arguably reached their peak in the flurry of corporate announcements that emerged after the 2020 killing of George Floyd.But, as Lauren explains, for decades conservative opposition to DEI has been growing, arguing instead for “colour blindness” over what is seen as “anti-meritocractic reverse discrimination”. This backlash has been spearheaded by activists, such as Edward Blum, making successful legal challenges to affirmative action policies within college admissions, as well as a growing cultural movement that blames more and more of the US’s problems on the push for diversity.Lauren explores whether the second Trump presidency will finally mean the end for DEI and its particular approach to equality and fairness. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      How did transgender children in the US become so politicized? | Moira Donegan

      by

      The politicization of transgender children in the US is one of the most astounding coups of propaganda and organized animus in recent history. Rarely has so much attention and rage been directed at such a minuscule number of people, and more rarely, still, have those people been the most vulnerable and blameless among us: kids and teens.The first state to pass a ban on transition-related care for minors was Arkansas, in April 2021; less than four years later, more than half of states have such a ban on the books. In 2016, North Carolina lost an estimated $3.76bn in revenue following boycotts after they passed a law banning trans people, including transgender students, from using appropriate restrooms in public facilities; now, 14 states have such bathroom bans on the books, and the boycotts have receded.These changes in public attitudes towards trans youth – from a broad if imperfect sentiment of tolerance to a widespread and politically weaponized attitude of hostility toward a small minority of kids – did not emerge by accident. It was the product of a deliberate, conscious effort to radicalize large swaths of the United States, and significant chunks of state policy, into a hostility towards a few children.That effort seems set to bear fruit now, at the US supreme court, in US v Skrmetti, a lawsuit brought by the ACLU and the Biden Department of Justice challenging Tennessee’s HB1, a sweeping ban on transition-related care for minors that was passed in 2023. The law prohibits any puberty blockers or hormones from being prescribed for the purposes of gender transition, but it does not prohibit these medications from being prescribed for any non-transition-related purpose. A minor can be prescribed puberty blockers, for instance, if their doctor believes they are experiencing early onset, or “precocious”, puberty; they cannot be prescribed puberty blockers to delay the onset of a puberty that may change their bodies in ways they do not desire for gender identity-related reasons.That means, too, that a child assigned male at birth could access, say, testosterone treatment, but a child assigned female at birth could not. In oral arguments on Wednesday, solicitor general Elizabeth Prelogar and Chase Strangio of the ACLU – the first trans attorney to argue before the supreme court – explained that this was a straightforward case of sex discrimination, and hence needed to be subjected to a heightened standard of judicial review under the 14th amendment’s equal protection clause.It will not be. A majority of the court’s conservatives seemed poised to uphold the ban on transgender healthcare, though for a variety of different reasons. Brett Kavanaugh made his usual mealy-mouthed paean to states’ rights, an argument he always makes in questions of federally guaranteed equality provisions, but not before extolling the hypothetical suffering of teenagers who may access gender-affirming care but then later come to regret it. (One wonders if there are any choices from his own adolescence that Brett Kavanaugh has come to regret.) Clarence Thomas and chief justice John Roberts, meanwhile, both advanced the idea that the physiological differences between male and female bodies could moot the equal protection clause’s reach, giving states broad leeway to regulate medicine in ways that would uphold gender hierarchy.For his part, Samuel Alito also seemed interested in the idea that states might have a right to effect gender discrimination via their regulation of medicine. He repeatedly cited the 1974 case Geduldig v Aiello, in which the supreme court ruled that states could discriminate on the basis of pregnancy, and that pregnancy discrimination was not sex discrimination – because even though only female people become pregnant, not all of them are pregnant all of the time. (At the time, Congress found the outcome in Geduldig so egregious that it passed a law clarifying that pregnancy discrimination does count as sex discrimination for the purposes of federal civil rights law, and the precedent was largely mooted, but Alito’s controlling opinion in Dobbs has revived it.)But Alito, true to form, did not confine his opining to the notion that discrimination against trans people does not count as sex-based discrimination: he went on to suggest that trans people are not quite real, peppering Strangio, in a scene that seemed intended to humiliate the trans attorney, with questions about whether trans identity was truly an “immutable” characteristic. For his part, Strangio responded with a dignity and respect that Alito’s line of questioning did not merit.It was not the only low moment. James Matthew Rice, the Tennessee solicitor general who defended the ban in court, repeatedly compared gender affirming care with suicide, as well as to lobotomies and eugenics. During his time, justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, with occasional assists from Elena Kagan, tried to chase Rice down on the inconsistencies in his own argument.Tennessee claimed, after all, that the law did not discriminate on the basis of patients’ sex, but rather on the basis of the purpose of their treatment; when the liberal justices pointed out that this was a distinction without a difference, because the purpose of the treatment was dependent on the patients’ sex, Rice simply repeated his assertion that there was a difference, there, somewhere. Jackson, in particular, worked to get Rice to explain his position for some time. He declined to.To call the Tennessee ban sex-neutral is laughable, almost insulting. The statute itself makes gender conformity its explicit justification in its text, saying that it aims to prohibit “sex inconsistent treatment”, or anything that “might encourage minors to become disdainful of their sex”. The law has long included sex role stereotyping within the purview of sex discrimination; Tennessee has sought to enforce sex roles, and sexed embodiment, with the force of the state. There is no good faith reading of the law that would allow it to withstand the scrutiny that the 14th amendment requires. But luckily for Tennessee, this is not a good faith court.

      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More