Women’s Rights

Subterms

    Latest story

    113 Shares42 Views

    Steeling My Daughters Against a New Kind of Misogyny

    by

    Since President Trump started announcing his cabinet picks, I have been trying to write a Very Serious Essay about the Current State of Feminism.When Pete Hegseth was confirmed, even after so many horrifying details of allegations of sexual assault and harassment, that seemed like an obvious blow to the basic ideals of gender equality. In a marginally just world for women, credible allegations of sexual or domestic violence would prevent a person from being considered for such a vaunted position in the first place.I started trying to write this essay by gathering data about women’s progress and trying to quantify how it has stalled. Though the vibes seem truly awful, I didn’t want to go by just potentially illusory internet trends or the vile choices of our commander in chief.Yet it would be disingenuous to ignore how far we have come since the 1970s, when most women didn’t even have access to credit. Women now outnumber men at American colleges and in the college-educated labor force. A higher percentage of Gen Z women say they’re feminists than women of any other generation.But: Roe is dead. Who knows what might happen with access to contraceptives or abortion medication in the next four years?We’re in a period of backlash against women’s progress, beyond what is happening in and around the Oval Office. “Surveys from 2024 show that support for traditional gender roles is increasing” among both Republican men and Republican women, according to the political scientists Michael Tesler, John Sides and Colette Marcellin in a guest essay for Times Opinion. They conclude that “any growing gender traditionalism may be a reaction to societal trends and not a cause of these trends.”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

    More stories

    • 138 Shares52 Views

      in Elections

      Justice Dept. Signals It Will End Challenge to Idaho Abortion Ban

      by

      The Trump administration is poised to roll back a Biden-era legal effort to blunt the effects of the overturning of Roe v. Wade.The Justice Department plans to drop a Biden-era challenge to Idaho’s law banning abortion in nearly all circumstances, a move that could end access to most abortions for women in the state whose pregnancy poses serious health risks, according to a court filing on Tuesday.The decision represents one of the first major steps under President Trump to roll back former Attorney General Merrick B. Garland’s efforts to blunt the impact of the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling overturning Roe v. Wade.The Trump administration plans to “dismiss its claims in the above case, without prejudice” as early as Wednesday, a lawyer with the department’s civil division wrote in an email to lawyers for the state’s largest hospital system.The action would effectively lift a federal appellate court’s hold on parts of the near-total ban, which was passed by the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature in 2020 in anticipation of the nullification of the national right to an abortion.Excerpts from the government’s email were included in a request in Federal District Court by the Boise-based St. Luke’s Health System for a new temporary freeze to give it time to adjust to the law, which bans all abortions other than those required to prevent a woman’s death, or in certain cases of rape or incest.Hospitals in Idaho need the temporary delay “to train their staff about the change in legal obligations” and to arrange logistics “to airlift patients out of state” if they require an abortion rendered illegal in Idaho, wrote Wendy J. Olson, a lawyer for the system.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

    • 138 Shares60 Views

      in Elections

      Overlooked No More: Maria W. Stewart, Trailblazing Voice for Black Women

      by

      She was the first Black woman to publicly address other women, using essays and lectures in the 1830s to champion their rights and challenge oppression.This article is part of Overlooked, a series of obituaries about remarkable people whose deaths, beginning in 1851, went unreported in The Times.One day in 1831, Maria W. Stewart walked into the Boston offices of the publisher William Lloyd Garrison with a manuscript in hand that she was hoping he would print in his recently launched newspaper, The Liberator.Garrison was a famous white abolitionist; Stewart was a 28-year-old former indentured servant. In her manuscript, a political manifesto, she recounted her upbringing and described the conditions for Black women in an oppressive America.She also argued for equal opportunity for Black Americans, and she did something no Black woman had done before: speak directly and publicly to other women, urging them to educate themselves, “to promote and patronize each other” and, even more, “to sue for your rights and privileges.” As the historian Kristin Waters, the author of “Maria W. Stewart and the Roots of Black Political Thought” (2022), told Worcester State University in 2022, Stewart was “one of the very first writers to express what we would now call ‘feminism.’”Garrison didn’t hesitate to publish Stewart’s “Religion and the Pure Principles of Morality, the Sure Foundation on Which We Must Build,” as well as many more of her essays, in what would become America’s pre-eminent abolitionist newspaper.The masthead of the Oct. 8, 1831, issue of the Liberator, which contained Stewart’s first essay.The LiberatorWe 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 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Protests in Kenya Demand Action Over a Spate of Brutal Murders of Women

      by

      Almost 100 women have been killed in the span of three months, the police say. Rights groups want President William Ruto to declare femicide a national crisis.A university student was murdered, and her body dumped in a field. A long-distance Olympic runner died after she was severely burned in a gasoline attack. And a mother, her daughter and her niece were tortured and then killed, their mutilated bodies disposed of in different locations.A series of brutal murders in Kenya in recent months, documented by the police and human rights groups, has stunned a nation where anger over violence against women and girls has prompted nationwide protests. Calls are intensifying for the authorities to do more to stop the killings.The police say that 97 women were murdered from August to October this year, a staggering toll even in Kenya, where femicide has long been endemic. In July, sacks containing the body parts of women believed to have been murdered by a serial killer were discovered in a dump in the capital, Nairobi.On Tuesday, thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of Nairobi, demanding that the government take action to stop the killings. Smaller protests also took place in other towns and cities across the country, human rights groups said.In Nairobi, police tear-gassed demonstrators who had been chanting, “Stop killing women” and, “Women have rights, too.” At least three activists, including the executive director of Amnesty International Kenya, were detained, according to a statement by several rights groups.The outpouring of rage reflected the helplessness felt by many women in Kenya, and the desire to get justice for those who have been killed.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

    • 125 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      For Iranian Women, Can a Revolution Take Place at Home?

      by

      .fallbackimg:before { content: “”; position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; background-image: url(”); opacity: 0.5; background-size: cover; background-position: center; } #bgvideo{ opacity: 0.5; } .mobile-only{ display:block; } .desktop-only{ display:none; } h1.headline.mobile-only{ margin-bottom: 0; } @media screen and (min-width: 740px){ .fallbackimg:before{ background-image: url(”); opacity: 0.5; } #bgvideo{ opacity: 0.5; } .mobile-only{ display:none; } […] More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Wyoming’s Abortion Bans Are Unconstitutional, Judge Rules

      by

      The ruling found that two state laws — one barring use of abortion pills, and one banning all forms of abortion — violated the state Constitution’s “fundamental right to make health care decisions.” A Wyoming judge ruled on Monday that two state abortion bans — including the first state law specifically banning the use of pills for abortion — violated the Wyoming Constitution and could not be enforced.Judge Melissa Owens of Teton County District Court wrote in her ruling that both the ban on medication abortion and a broader ban against all methods of abortion “impede the fundamental right to make health care decisions for an entire class of people, pregnant women.” She added, “The abortion statutes suspend a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions during the entire term of a pregnancy and are not reasonable or necessary to protect the health and general welfare of the people.”Enforcement of the two abortion bans, passed last year, had been temporarily halted by Judge Owens while the court case proceeded. Her decision on Monday blocks the laws permanently, although the state is expected to appeal. Efforts to reach the state attorney general’s office and the governor’s office were unsuccessful on Monday night.The suit to block the bans was filed by a group of plaintiffs that included two abortion providers in Wyoming; an obstetrician-gynecologist who often treats high-risk pregnancies; an emergency-room nurse; a fund that gives financing to abortion patients; and a woman who said her Jewish faith required access to abortion if a pregnant woman’s physical or mental health or life was in danger.An amendment to the Wyoming Constitution, approved by an overwhelming majority of the state’s voters in 2012, guarantees adults the right to make their own health care decisions.In court last year, the state, represented by Jay Jerde, a special assistant attorney general for Wyoming, argued that even though doctors and other health providers must be involved in abortions, there were many instances in which abortion was not “health care” because “it’s not restoring the woman’s body from pain, physical disease or sickness.”Mr. Jerde also argued that the constitutional amendment allowing people to make decisions about their own health care did not apply to abortion because terminating a pregnancy affected not just the woman making the decision, but the fetus as well.Judge Owens rejected both of those arguments. She wrote: “The uncontested facts establish that the abortion statutes fail to accomplish any of the asserted interests by the state. The state did not present any evidence refuting or challenging the extensive medical testimony presented by the plaintiffs.”Dr. Giovannina Anthony, an obstetrician-gynecologist and abortion provider who was one of the plaintiffs in the case, said on Monday night that she was “grateful and relieved that the judge agreed that abortion is health care and that abortion bans violate the rights of pregnant women.”Dr. Anthony said she expected the state to appeal. “This is not the end of the fight in Wyoming, but for now we can continue to provide evidence-based care without fear of a prison sentence.” More

    • 225 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      ¿La elección de Trump fue un revés para las mujeres de EE. UU.? Ni ellas están de acuerdo

      by

      Kamala Harris habría sido la primera mujer presidenta en los casi 250 años de historia del país. Pero muchas mujeres eligieron a Donald Trump, a pesar de su historial de sexismo.Para muchos estadounidenses de izquierda, está rotundamente claro que las mujeres que apoyaron a Donald Trump en las elecciones presidenciales votaron en contra de sus propios intereses.Las mujeres liberales, en particular, han pasado los últimos días prácticamente atónitas, dándole vueltas a cómo otras mujeres podrían haber rechazado a Kamala Harris, quien habría sido la primera mujer en dirigir Estados Unidos en sus casi 250 años de historia. En su lugar, eligieron a un candidato que desperdiga misoginia aparentemente con regocijo. Por segunda vez.Una votante de Maine, entrevistada después de que Trump declarara la victoria, ofreció una reflexión compartida por muchas personas. En sus palabras: “La hermandad no apareció”.En muchos sentidos, los resultados de las elecciones parecieron contradecir generaciones de avances hacia la igualdad de la mujer y para el feminismo en general. En las últimas décadas, las mujeres han avanzado en casi todas las facetas de la vida estadounidense, representan en general una mayor proporción de la mano de obra que en el pasado, ocupan puestos de trabajo bien remunerados y superan a los hombres en la educación superior, aunque siguen estando infrarrepresentadas en los niveles más altos de la empresa y el gobierno.Ahora se encuentran en un país donde Trump ganó decisivamente con una campaña que enfrentó a hombres contra mujeres, sentándose con conductores de pódcast que comercian con el sexismo y eligiendo a un compañero de fórmula que había criticado a las mujeres solteras como “señoras con gatos y sin hijos”. Trump se atribuyó el mérito de nombrar a los jueces de la Corte Suprema que anularon el derecho constitucional al aborto, pero pareció pagar un bajo precio en las urnas. Inmediatamente después de las elecciones circularon por las redes sociales publicaciones de hombres que decían: “tu cuerpo, mi elección”.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

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      At Women’s March Event, Organizers Say They Are Preparing a ‘Comeback Tour’

      by

      At a demonstration on Saturday, the crowd was small and enthusiasm was lacking. But organizers are planning a big march ahead of the inauguration.On Saturday, after former President Donald J. Trump’s re-election dashed progressives’ hopes of a new era for women’s rights and other left-wing causes, Women’s March held a hastily arranged protest-cum-dance party outside the headquarters of a conservative think tank in Washington. Only about a few hundred people showed up.The first Women’s March, held in the aftermath of Mr. Trump’s 2017 inauguration, drew hundreds of thousands of people to the National Mall in Washington to protest what they feared would be an assault on reproductive rights, immigrants and civil rights under his administration. But this week, Women’s March organizers are grappling with despair among their base that the president they oppose has been elected to a second term, and questions about where the movement is headed.The goal of the Saturday afternoon event was to reinvigorate the organization’s progressive base after the election and perhaps to unleash some anger at the Heritage Foundation, the think tank that had designed a policy playbook for a second Trump administration, Project 2025, whose goals included aggressively curtailing access to abortion. The foundation did not immediately respond on Saturday evening to a request for comment.“You are not going to take our joy,” said Rachel O’Leary Carmona, the executive director of Women’s March, before singing along to the music.But while a band and a D.J. played upbeat songs at top volume, the crowd did not do much more than sway to the beat.The hastily arranged protest doubled as a dance party outside the headquarters of a conservative think tank.Tierney L. Cross for The New York TimesWe 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

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      At Women’s March in Washington, Hope That They Will Hold Off Trump

      by

      Nearly eight years after the first Women’s March in Washington demonstrated a furious backlash to the election of Donald J. Trump, thousands of women gathered again in the capital and across the country on Saturday, this time with the hope that Vice President Kamala Harris would triumph at the polls and prevent his return to the White House.The rally and march, taking place three days before the election, was much smaller than the original in 2017 that drew at least 470,000 people — three times the number of people who had attended Mr. Trump’s inauguration the day before. But the mood was far more optimistic, if also somewhat combative.The rally at Freedom Plaza was primarily focused on threats to women’s reproductive rights and other liberties.Cheriss May for The New York Times“We will not go back!” was the rallying cry on Saturday, echoing what has become a signature line for Ms. Harris on the campaign trail. While the march was primarily focused on threats to women’s reproductive rights and other liberties, speakers and signs expressed support for a wide array of Democratic and progressive policy positions. Those included gun control, transgender rights and support for Palestinians. The speakers also urged people to vote, and to take others to vote, although many people in the crowd said they had already cast a ballot for Ms. Harris.“I just hope that all these people — not just women, but men — convince a few people to vote and vote the way we want them. Vote for democracy and our rights, reproductive rights,” said Janice Wolbrink, 69.Ms. Wolbrink was joined by her two sisters, each carrying a bright pink sign that read, “Now you’ve pissed-off Grandma.” Together, the three of them had 24 grandchildren.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