Welcome to The Isis Chronicles!

June 21, 2018

By Catherine E. Shoichet, CNN

[Breaking news update, 2:53 p.m. ET:] 

The US government will release Beata Mariana de Jesus Mejia-Mejia's son, Darwin, by 4:30 p.m. ET, according to Sarah Fabian with the Justice Department's Office of Immigration Litigation. 

The announcement was made Thursday afternoon in federal court in Washington, where Mejia and her attorney, Mario Williams, appeared. Williams said the case has been resolved and that Darwin will be flown to the Washington area to be reunited with his mother. 

[Original story, published 1:50 p.m. ET:]

Washington (CNN) -- For a month now, Beata Mariana de Jesus Mejia-Mejia says she's been asking a devastating question: Where is my son?

The 38-year-old Guatemalan woman says no one has given her a clear answer.

"It's not fair for a mother," she told CNN this week, hours after filing a lawsuit against several government agencies and top Trump administration officials. "It's like they're putting a knife in your chest and killing you."

More than a month after she crossed the US-Mexico border and a week after she was released from an Arizona immigration detention center on bond, Mejia is scheduled to appear in a federal court in Washington Thursday to make her case with only one goal in mind: getting her son back.

"I would like to know where he is. To go find him. To go bring him back. This is my priority," she says. "I want my son."

Seeking a reunion, and damages

Mejia says she and her son came to the United States seeking asylum, fleeing death threats and domestic violence from her husband in Guatemala. They crossed the border May 19 near San Luis, Arizona, according to the lawsuit, and were immediately approached by Border Patrol agents and taken into custody.

Despite executive order, families may not be put back together

In her lawsuit, Mejia accuses US officials of violating her rights when they took her 7-year-old son, Darwin, from her at an Arizona immigrant holding facility just a few days after their arrival.

She's asking a judge to order officials to reunite them, and she's seeking damages for pain and suffering.

It's not the only case to challenge the Trump administration's months-long practice of separating kids and parents at the border, but it appears to be the first filed by an individual since officials announced their controversial "zero tolerance" policy.

On Wednesday a group of detained immigrants filed a similar lawsuit asking a federal court to reunite them with their children. And the ACLU has filed a class action lawsuit over family separations.

In an executive order Wednesday, Trump said he was reversing course and would be moving toward keeping families together in detention rather than splitting them up. But it's unclear how the executive order could affect families who were already separated. HHS officials have said they're awaiting guidance.

Mejia and her legal team say they're still waiting for word on her son's whereabouts -- and when he'll be released. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have not responded to CNN's requests for information on Mejia's immigration case. And the Department of Health and Human Services' Administration for Children and Families, which runs shelters that house unaccompanied minors and children separated from their parents, hasn't responded to a request for comment on her son's case.

The Department of Homeland Security and US Customs and Border Protection declined to comment, citing their policy of not discussing pending litigation. 

Their last days together

Mejia pointed to two photos of her son this week as she spoke with reporters and pleaded for help with her case: a smiling selfie she said she snapped at their church in Guatemala, and a black-and-white photo US immigration authorities took after taking them into custody. 

Mejia says she took this selfie of her and her son at their church in Guatemala.

In that photo, Mejia is carrying her son on her back. She's smiling. He's sleeping, his head resting on her shoulder.

It was just a few days later, she says, that their world turned upside down.

Mejia says she never expected officials would take Darwin from her. The day they did, she says, they offered no explanation. They simply called his name, took him away and wouldn't answer any questions, she says.

According to the lawsuit, when officials took away her son, "he was screaming and crying and did not want to be taken away from his mother."

Mejia says that was the last time she saw him.

'They don't give anyone any answers'

Mejia was held for weeks at the Eloy Detention Center in Arizona, where she says she met many other women who were also frantically searching for their children after being separated at the border.

"They don't give anyone any answers," she says, though she says she did hear one official respond with a question: "Who sent you to come to my country?"

At one point, according to the lawsuit, an officer at Eloy told Mejia her son was being held at a facility in Phoenix, Arizona, but Mejia says officials provided no additional details on his whereabouts.

There are 2,300 migrant kids spread across the US. What happens to them next?

Mejia was released from custody June 15 after an immigration bond company, Libre by Nexus, paid her $12,500 bond. A legal division of the company is representing her in court.

The bond payment and legal representation are being provided pro bono as part of a program for indigent clients, Nexus Services CEO Mike Donovan says.

The company has faced accusations of exploiting immigrants and is reportedly under investigation in several states over its practices.

Asked about the allegations, Donovan says Mejia's case is just one example of how his company's actions speak louder that any words.

"I care about people. I want mass incarceration in this country to end. And I want incarceration without justification, and incarceration of little kids, especially, to end," he said.

Judge rules that challenge to family separation at the border can proceed

Mejia says she's been living with a friend in Austin, Texas, since her release from custody, but traveled to Washington this week for the court hearing. She was accompanied by her lawyers and representatives of Libre by Nexus when she spoke to CNN.

At one point on Wednesday, a day after filing the lawsuit, Mejia's legal team says they got word that her son would be released. Mejia was thrilled, Donovan said.

"She was crying, shaking, very emotional," he said.

Hours later, Donovan says he had to tell Mejia devastating news. Officials had decided to keep Darwin in custody; according to Donovan, they didn't say why.

Donovan called the development "alarming and frustrating," adding that Mejia and her legal team were still planning to head to court Thursday.

His voice on the phone sounded different

Mejia says she's afraid something has happened to her son during their time apart. She's only been able to speak to him on the phone once. That day, she says, an official helped them get in touch after she passed her credible fear screening -- a step that cleared the way for her to continue with her asylum case.

These migrants are undeterred: 'It's been too long a journey to give up now'

The voice on the other end of the line, she says, didn't sound like her son at all. Her normally vibrant child didn't call her Mami like he usually does, she says. In fact, he didn't say much at all. 

"I didn't recognize him, because he didn't talk to me like that before, with sadness, a knot in his throat," she says.

She asked how he was. "Fine," he told her. But right away, she says she sensed that he wasn't.

"He is already different. I don't know what's happening," Mejia says. "I don't know if he's being threatened or what is happening with them, because my son was not like that."

Since then, Mejia says, she's tried repeatedly to call the number officials gave her to track down her son. It rings and rings, she says, but no one answers.

CNN's Rosa Flores, Gisela Crespo, Alberto Moya and Jessica Schneider contributed to this report.

What's this item about? What makes it interesting? Write a catchy description to grab your audience's attention...

November 29, 2017

Key facts

• Violence against women – particularly intimate partner violence and sexual violence – is a major public health problem and a violation of women's human rights.

• Global estimates published by WHO indicate that about 1 in 3 (35%) of women worldwide have experienced either physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence or non-partner sexual violence in their lifetime.

• Most of this violence is intimate partner violence. Worldwide, almost one third (30%) of women who have been in a relationship report that they have experienced some form of physical and/or sexual violence by their intimate partner in their lifetime.

• Globally, as many as 38% of murders of women are committed by a male intimate partner.

• Violence can negatively affect women’s physical, mental, sexual, and reproductive health, and may increase the risk of acquiring HIV in some settings.

• Men are more likely to perpetrate violence if they have low education, a history of child maltreatment, exposure to domestic violence against their mothers, harmful use of alcohol, unequal gender norms including attitudes accepting of violence, and a sense of entitlement over women.

• Women are more likely to experience intimate partner violence if they have low education, exposure to mothers being abused by a partner, abuse during childhood, and attitudes accepting violence, male privilege, and women’s subordinate status.

• There is evidence that advocacy and empowerment counseling interventions, as well as home visitation, are promising in preventing or reducing intimate partner violence against women.

• Situations of conflict, post-conflict and displacement may exacerbate existing violence, such as by intimate partners, as well as and non-partner sexual violence, and may also lead to new forms of violence against women.

Introduction

The United Nations defines violence against women as "any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual, or mental harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life." (1)

Intimate partner violence refers to behaviour by an intimate partner or ex-partner that causes physical, sexual or psychological harm, including physical aggression, sexual coercion, psychological abuse and controlling behaviours.

Sexual violence is "any sexual act, attempt to obtain a sexual act, or other act directed against a person’s sexuality using coercion, by any person regardless of their relationship to the victim, in any setting. It includes rape, defined as the physically forced or otherwise coerced penetration of the vulva or anus with a penis, other body part or object."

• World report on violence and health

Scope of the problem

Population-level surveys based on reports from victims provide the most accurate estimates of the prevalence of intimate partner violence and sexual violence. A 2013 analysis conduct by WHO with the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the South Africa Medical Research Council, used existing data from over 80 countries and found that worldwide, 1 in 3, or 35%, of women have experienced physical and/or sexual violence by an intimate partner or non-partner sexual violence (3).

• Global and regional estimates of violence against women

Almost one third (30%) of all women who have been in a relationship have experienced physical and/or sexual violence by their intimate partner. The prevalence estimates of intimate partner violence range from 23.2% in high-income countries and 24.6% in the WHO Western Pacific region to 37% in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean region, and 37.7% in the WHO South-East Asia region.

Globally as many as 38% of all murders of women are committed by intimate partners. In addition to intimate partner violence, globally 7% of women report having been sexually assaulted by someone other than a partner, although data for non-partner sexual violence are more limited. Intimate partner and sexual violence are mostly perpetrated by men against women.

Risk factors

Factors associated with intimate partner and sexual violence occur at individual, family, community and wider society levels. Some are associated with being a perpetrator of violence, some are associated with experiencing violence and some are associated with both.

Risk factors for both intimate partner and sexual violence include:

• lower levels of education (perpetration of sexual violence and experience of sexual violence);

• a history of exposure to child maltreatment (perpetration and experience);

• witnessing family violence (perpetration and experience);

• antisocial personality disorder (perpetration);

• harmful use of alcohol (perpetration and experience);

• having multiple partners or suspected by their partners of infidelity (perpetration);

• attitudes that condone violence (perpetration);

• community norms that privilege or ascribe higher status to men and lower status to women; and

• low levels of women’s access to paid employment.

Factors specifically associated with intimate partner violence include:

• past history of violence

• marital discord and dissatisfaction

• difficulties in communicating between partners

• male controlling behaviors towards their partners.

Factors specifically associated with sexual violence perpetration include:

• beliefs in family honour and sexual purity

• ideologies of male sexual entitlement

• weak legal sanctions for sexual violence.

Gender inequality and norms on the acceptability of violence against women are a root cause of violence against women.

Health consequences

Intimate partner (physical, sexual and emotional) and sexual violence cause serious short- and long-term physical, mental, sexual and reproductive health problems for women. They also affect their children, and lead to high social and economic costs for women, their families and societies. Such violence can:

• Have fatal outcomes like homicide or suicide.

• Lead to injuries, with 42% of women who experience intimate partner violence reporting an injury as a consequence of this violence.

• Lead to unintended pregnancies, induced abortions, gynaecological problems, and sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. The 2013 analysis found that women who had been physically or sexually abused were 1.5 times more likely to have a sexually transmitted infection and, in some regions, HIV, compared to women who had not experienced partner violence. They are also twice as likely to have an abortion.

• Intimate partner violence in pregnancy also increases the likelihood of miscarriage, stillbirth, pre-term delivery and low birth weight babies. The same 2013 study showed that women who experienced intimate partner violence were 16% more likely to suffer a miscarriage and 41% more likely to have a pre-term birth.

• These forms of violence can lead to depression, post-traumatic stress and other anxiety disorders, sleep difficulties, eating disorders, and suicide attempts. The 2013 analysis found that women who have experienced intimate partner violence were almost twice as likely to experience depression and problem drinking.

• Health effects can also include headaches, back pain, abdominal pain, gastrointestinal disorders, limited mobility and poor overall health.

• Sexual violence, particularly during childhood, can lead to increased smoking, drug and alcohol misuse, and risky sexual behaviours in later life. It is also associated with perpetration of violence (for males) and being a victim of violence (for females).

Impact on children

• Children who grow up in families where there is violence may suffer a range of behavioural and emotional disturbances. These can also be associated with perpetrating or experiencing violence later in life.

• Intimate partner violence has also been associated with higher rates of infant and child mortality and morbidity (through, for example, diarrhoeal disease or malnutrition).

Social and economic costs

The social and economic costs of intimate partner and sexual violence are enormous and have ripple effects throughout society. Women may suffer isolation, inability to work, loss of wages, lack of participation in regular activities and limited ability to care for themselves and their children.

Prevention and response

There are a growing number of well-designed studies looking at the effectiveness of prevention and response programmes. More resources are needed to strengthen the prevention of and response to intimate partner and sexual violence, including primary prevention – stopping it from happening in the first place.

There is some evidence from high-income countries that advocacy and counselling interventions to improve access to services for survivors of intimate partner violence are effective in reducing such violence. Home visitation programmes involving health worker outreach by trained nurses also show promise in reducing intimate partner violence. However, these have yet to be assessed for use in resource-poor settings.

In low resource settings, prevention strategies that have been shown to be promising include: those that empower women economically and socially through a combination of microfinance and skills training related to gender equality; that promote communication and relationship skills within couples and communities; that reduce access to, and harmful use of alcohol; transform harmful gender and social norms through community mobilization and group-based participatory education with women and men to generate critical reflections about unequal gender and power relationships.

To achieve lasting change, it is important to enact and enforce legislation and develop and implement policies that promote gender equality by:

• ending discrimination against women in marriage, divorce and custody laws

• ending discrimination in inheritance laws and ownership of assets

• improving women’s access to paid employment

• developing and resourcing national plans and policies to address violence against women.

While preventing and responding to violence against women requires a multi-sectoral approach, the health sector has an important role to play. The health sector can:

• Advocate to make violence against women unacceptable and for such violence to be addressed as a public health problem.

• Provide comprehensive services, sensitize and train health care providers in responding to the needs of survivors holistically and empathetically.

• Prevent recurrence of violence through early identification of women and children who are experiencing violence and providing appropriate referral and support

• Promote egalitarian gender norms as part of life skills and comprehensive sexuality education curricula taught to young people.

• Generate evidence on what works and on the magnitude of the problem by carrying out population-based surveys, or including violence against women in population-based demographic and health surveys, as well as in surveillance and health information systems.

WHO response

At the World Health Assembly in May 2016, Member States endorsed a global plan of action on strengthening the role of the health systems in addressing interpersonal violence, in particular against women and girls and against children.

• A global plan of action to strengthen the role of the health system within a national multisectoral response to address interpersonal violence, in particular against women and girls, and against children

WHO, in collaboration with partners, is:

• Building the evidence base on the size and nature of violence against women in different settings and supporting countries' efforts to document and measure this violence and its consequences, including improving the methods for measuring violence against women in the context of monitoring for the Sustainable Development Goals. This is central to understanding the magnitude and nature of the problem and to initiating action in countries and globally.

• Strengthening research and capacity to assess interventions to address partner violence.

• Undertaking interventions research to test and identify effective health sector interventions to address violence against women.

• Developing guidelines and implementation tools for strengthening the health sector response to intimate partner and sexual violence and synthesizing evidence on what works to prevent such violence.

• Supporting countries and partners to implement the global plan of action on violence by:

• Collaborating with international agencies and organizations to reduce and eliminate violence globally through initiatives such as the Sexual Violence Research Initiative, Together for Girls, the Violence Against Women Working Group of the International Federation of Obstetrician-Gynecologists (FIGO) and the UN Joint Programme on Essential Services Package for Women Subject to Violence.

(1) United Nations. Declaration on the elimination of violence against women. New York: UN, 1993.

What's this item about? What makes it interesting? Write a catchy description to grab your audience's attention...

January 23, 2016

On January 19,, 2016, the Women’s Equality Act became law in New York. What do these new sex-based discrimination laws do for you? The laws strengthen New York’s equal pay statute, expands protection for victims of sexual harassment, requires your employer to be flexible when you’re pregnant and need support, provides for the recovery of attorneys’ fees in sex-based employment discrimination cases, and the Women’s Equality Act prohibits discrimination based on your family status. Not too shabby.

Rights Expanded for Pregnant Employees

That’s big news. The New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL) which prohibits discrimination in employment throughout New York, now requires employers with 4 or more employees to “reasonably accommodate” you when you’re pregnant, unless it would create an “undue hardship” on your employer.

In plain English that means your pregnancy-related medical condition or limitation must be flexibly accommodated, like any other temporary disability must, unless, for just a few examples, your company can show that providing you with a chair to sit on occasionally would be a hardship on their business, or that allowing you more frequent bathroom breaks, or days off for sonogram appointments, or restrictions on lifting heavy objects, is too much of a hardship on your employer, but that’s not easy for the employer to prove.

Got Equal Pay? Until now, New York Law required that men and women must receive equal pay for equal work unless the employer could show that the difference in pay was based on: (a) a seniority system; (b) a merit system; (c) a system that measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; (d) or, any factor other than sex.  It’s that last one, factor (d) that gave employers all kinds of cover and excuses to argue ridiculous non-gender based reasons why they can pay you less than a man performing the same job.

The new Equal Pay law amends the statute to strengthen the prohibitions against unequal pay and it makes it considerably easier to prove a violation. First, the employer can no longer rely on the “any factor other than sex” loophole to justify a difference in pay between a man and a woman doing the same job. Now, the employer must show that the difference is based on a “bona fide factor other than sex, such as education, training and experience,” and employers can no longer prohibit employees from sharing wage information with other employees. This will enable you to learn whether your co-worker who is doing the same job is being paid more than you just because he’s a boy. This is a big deal and will certainly make it easier to hold employers accountable for unequal pay.

And here’s the kicker. The new law increases the amount of recoverable damages from 100% of the amount of unpaid wages to 300%. So, women who were paid unequal wages will be entitled to recover up to three times the amount of unpaid wages. Now, that’s what I’m talking about. Real power to rectify rampant gender pay disparity. 

Sexually Harassed by an Employer with Less than Four Employees? No Problem.

About 60% of New York’s private employers have fewer than four employees, and until now, the NYSHRL did not apply to employers with less than four employees, and that’s still true for all other claims of discrimination, except for claims of sexual harassment, which now only requires that one employee work for your company! The new law protects all employees from sexual harassment regardless of the size of the workplace. Even if you are the only employee, if you’re being sexually harassed, that’s now illegal sex discrimination in NY, and you can take action and do something about it.

Attorney’s Fees Are Now Available in Sex Discrimination Cases

New York law did not provide for an award of attorneys’ fees to a female employee who won her case in any kind of employment discrimination claim, before the Women’s Equality Act became law.  Now, the new statute provides for an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees for successful sex discrimination claims, which is huge, because when a company knows that it may have to pay your lawyer after you win, it either makes them do the right thing in the first place to avoid losing in court, or it makes them want to settle with you sooner to avoid the risk of paying your legal fees after you prove your case in court, and, if your company is ordered to pay your legal fees, that puts more money into your pocket for the sexual harassment, abuse and suffering you endured.

Family Status Discrimination is Now Illegal in New York

The NYSHRL now includes a prohibition against discrimination in employment based on “familial status,” which basically means that non-traditional living arrangements including custody of children are now protected, but at heart this new law is designed to protects single mothers,women who will now be able to bring claims under state law alleging they were denied employment or a promotion, or were terminated or harassed because of their status as a single parent. Even though the law is gender neutral and protects men as well as women, as a practical matter it’s mostly women who are penalized for expecting or having children, so “familial status” discrimination is a welcome expansion of the NYSHRL.

Ecofeminism sees parallels between the exploitation of nature and the exploitation of women, parallels that are understood in the context of patriarchy. One particularly vigorous ecofeminist analysis stems from the work of Claudia von Werlhof and Maria Mies.

Claudia von Werlhof has considered the standard Left analysis of capitalism, and she finds it inadequate, especially in its failure to address issues of patriarchy. The Left’s position on patriarchy, she says, assumes that it is a “quasi-irrational historical remnant” that will eventually be discarded by capitalism and overcome by ‘progress’. However, for von Werlhof, patriarchy is the foundation or ‘deep structure’ of capitalism and cannot be discarded by it.

She gives the example of science and technology to illustrate this point. Modern capitalist patriarchy knows no technological restrictions and, as the instrument of capital, modern science and technology sets out to ‘substitute’ (ie extinguish) life and death, the creation of life, humanity, women and mothers, the earth, plants and animals, and matter itself. This is a profound expression of the patriarchal urge to dominate and control. Since the Left does not advocate forsaking technological progress, its analysis is deeply compromised.

Thus the Left is unable to present a real alternative to the ecologically and socially destructive system we are living in. So – what is the ecofeminist alternative to capitalism that von Werlhof and her colleagues propose?

Maria Mies presents a vision for an alternative ecological society developed from the ecofeminist critique outlined above. She describes this vision as the ‘subsistence perspective.’ This is not to be confused with the usual understanding of a subsistence economy – it is not an economic model; rather, it is a new way of looking at the economy. It is a called a subsistence perspective because it focuses on the creation, recreation and support of life and the living, and it has no other purpose than this. It is life that stands at the centre of this vision, rather than money, economic growth or profit, and as such it requires the rejection of capitalist industrial society.

Even in the 1960s, Mies says, the working class in the cities of the western world engaged in many subsistence activities: growing vegetables, preserving fruit, sewing clothes, repairing household items. In the rural economy, small farms produced the majority of foodstuffs and supplied the urban population. Overall, there was considerable reciprocity, communality and mutual assistance, collective work and collective enjoyment. While city life and the rural economy is much changed, many of the elements of a subsistence perspective are not beyond living memory.

The subsistence perspective also addresses the deep sense of alienation caused by paid work, which cannot be overcome even by large amounts of money. The purpose of the economy is, supposedly, to make the ‘good life’ available to us – this idea goes all the way back to Aristotle; yet we work, we work and the good life never arrives. The subsistence perspective is all about making the good life a reality. This emphasises that the goal of subsistence is not a return to the misery of a medieval existence, as we might otherwise imagine by the use of the word ‘subsistence’. It is about creating a lifeworld outside of paid employment.

In a conference address given in 2005, Maria Mies outlined some of the principles of a society based on the subsistence perspective, as follows:

1. The economy must be re-embedded again in to society: Mies argues that we must recognise that the economy is just one of the human activities helping to bring about a good life for all – for humans and nature everywhere.

2. The concept of a good life must be redefined: A new concept of the good life cannot be based on the existing production and consumption system. It cannot mean the continual abundance of cheap commodities from all over the world in our supermarkets. Instead we must ask ‘What do people really need? And what is possible for all on a limited planet?

3. All dominant social relations will have to change: New non-hierarchical relations must be created between intellectual and manual labour and between producers and consumers. All exploitative, dominating colonial relations must be transformed into reciprocal, respectful, mutual ones.

4. A new society must eliminate all patriarchal, violent and militaristic relations: Mies sees this goal being achieved only through a total revolution of capitalist society, necessary in order to liberate women and men from patriarchal structures and violent ideologies. For example, she argues, we need to redefine the concept of ‘work’ so that all work, including the work of housewives, subsistence peasants and artisans, is considered valuable. The concepts of ‘productive work’ and ‘productivity’ will have to be liberated so that they promote the good life for all.

5. A life-centred subsistence economy and society can only permit technology that serves life: Technology is not value free. For example, the fast obsolescence of goods to maximise sales of new goods, which triggers the continuous production of scarcity, means that waste is built into economic growth. A life-oriented subsistence society and economy would produce a different philosophy of science as well as a different, nonexploitative, antigrowth-oriented, nondominating, nondestructive technology. Technology also shapes human relations and human communication. Modern computer technology atomises the workforce on a global level, creating worldwide competition among workers, to lower labour costs. In a subsistence society, workers would be encouraged to combine their efforts through communal ownership of the means of production. Subsistence production shifts away from organising and ordering life based on competition; instead it fosters cooperation to achieve rich, fulfilled lives for all.

Sources

Claudia von Werlhof (2007) No critique of capitalism without a critique of patriarchy! Why the Left is no alternative. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 18(1), 13-27.

Maria Mies (2006) CNS conference keynote address: “War is the father of all things” (Heraclitus) “but nature is the mother of life” (Claudia von Werlhof). Capitalism Nature Socialism, 17(1), 18-31.

O. Ressler (2005) Maria Mies: The subsistence perspective [film transcript].

What's this item about? What makes it interesting? Write a catchy description to grab your audience's attention...

January 31, 2018

​

"Ecofeminism is an activist and academic movement that sees critical connections between the domination of nature and the exploitation of women.... Ecofeminist activism grew during the 1980s and 1990s among women from the anti-nuclear, environmental, and lesbian-feminist movements. The “Women and Life on Earth: Ecofeminism in the Eighties” conference held at Amherst (1980) was the first in a series of ecofeminist conferences, inspiring the growth of ecofeminist organizations and actions..."
-- Lois Ann Lorentzen, University of San Francisco, and Heather Eaton, Saint Paul University (2002)

Mary Mellor (UK)

"Ecofeminism is a movement that sees a connection between the exploitation and degradation of the natural world and the subordination and oppression of women. It emerged in the mid-1970s alongside second-wave feminism and the green movement. Ecofeminism brings together elements of the feminist and green movements, while at the same time offering a challenge to both. It takes from the green movement a concern about the impact of human activities on the non-human world and from feminism the view of humanity as gendered in ways that subordinate, exploit and oppress women."-- From the introduction to "Feminism & Ecology" by Mary Mellor, New York Univerity Press,1997, p.1

From the introduction to Ecofeminism by Maria Mies (Germany) and Vandana Shiva (India), 1993
See new edition of this work, 2014: http://zedbooks.co.uk/node/20326

"Th(e) capitalist-patriarchal perspective interprets difference as hierarchical and uniformity as a prerequisite for equality. Our aim is to go beyond this narrow perspective and to express our diversity and, in different ways, address the inherent inequalities in world structures which permit the North to dominate the South, men to dominate women, and the frenetic plunder of ever more resources for ever more unequally distributed economic gain to dominate nature…

"…everywhere, women were the first to protest against environmental destruction. As activists in the ecology movements, it became clear to us that science and technology were not gender neutral; and in common with many other women, we began to see that the relationship of exploitative dominance between man and nature, (shaped by reductionist modern science since the 16th century) and the exploitative and oppressive relationship between men and women and prevails in most patriarchal societies, even modern industrial ones, were closely connected…

"If the final outcome of the present world system is a general threat to life on planet earth, then it is crucial to resuscitate and nurture the impulse and determination to survive, inherent in all living things…"

Ecofeminism
"Ecofeminism, a 'new term for an ancient wisdom' grew out of various social movements - the feminist, peace and ecology movements - in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Though the term was first used by Francoise D'Eaubonne it became popular only in the context of numerous protests and activities against environmental destruction, sparked-off initially by recurring ecological disasters. The meltdown at Three Mile Island prompted large numbers of women in the USA to come together in the first ecofeminist conference - 'Women and Life on Earth: A Conference on Eco-Feminism in the Eighties' - in March 1980, at Amherst. At this conference the connections between feminism and militarization, healing and ecology were explored. As Ynestra King, one of the Conference organizers, wrote:

'Ecofeminism is about connectedness and wholeness of theory and practice. It asserts the special strength and integrity of every living thing. For us the snail darter is to be considered side by side with a community's need for water, the porpoise side by side with appetite for tuna, and the creatures it may fall on with Skylab. We are a woman-identified movement and we believe we have a special work to do in these imperilled times. We see the devastation of the earth and her beings by the corporate warriors, and the threat of nuclear annihilation by the military warriors, as feminist concerns. It is the masculinist mentality which would deny us our right to our own bodies and our own sexuality, and which depends on multiple systems of dominance and state power to have its way.'

"Wherever women acted against ecological destruction or/and the threat of atomic annihilation, they immediately became aware of the connection between patriarchal violence against women, other people and nature, and that: In defying this patriarchy we are loyal to future generations and to life and this planet itself. We have a deep and particular understanding of this both through our natures and our experience as women."...

Ecofeminism and the subsistence perspective: fostering cooperation, not competition"

Ecofeminism sees parallels between the exploitation of nature and the exploitation of women, parallels that are understood in the context of patriarchy. One particularly vigorous ecofeminist analysis stems from the work of Claudia von Werlhof and Maria Mies." more

Uprooting the Patriarchy: "Ecofeminists say 'no more waiting'... 

"We are in a state of emergency and must do something about it now... around the world, economies, cultures and natural resources are plundered, so that 20 percent of the world's population (privileged North Americans and Europeans) can continue to consume 80 percent of its resources in the name of progress."
-- Lynn Wenzel quoted in "Uprooting The Patriarchy" by Joy Pincus, WIN Magazine

December 12, 2017

What's this item about? What makes it interesting? Write a catchy description to grab your audience's attention...

November 01, 2017

What's this item about? What makes it interesting? Write a catchy description to grab your audience's att

It’s easy to say now is not a great time to be a woman in tech. Women are still in the minority. They hold only 24% of computer science jobs, down from 37% in 1995, and occupy roughly 11% of executive positions in Silicon Valley. New revelations of sexism — like Google’s James Damore, who was fired after penning a manifesto on why women are biologically inferior, and Uber’s alleged atmosphere of sexual harassment and gender discrimination — have shown the ugly underbelly of the tech world in an unappealing new light.

But the 18 female tech leaders on FORBES’ list of the world’s most powerful women are in strong positions to start to turn things around in the tech world.

Sitting at the top of our tech list for the sixth year in a row (and in the No. 4 position on the overall Forbes Most Powerful Women list) is Facebook COO, Sheryl Sandberg. As the second in command at the $516 billion (market cap) company, Sandberg has been on Capitol Hill and in the media lately defending Facebook in the face of accusations that the social media site was complicit in Russian attempts to influence the 2016 presidential election. She is hoping that by improving transparency, Facebook can avoid Washington imposing new regulations on social platforms. Her Lean In organization continues to push for greater gender equality in the C-suite.

Ranking second (and overall No. 7 on the Power Women list) is YouTube’s Susan Wojcicki, who has been increasingly outspoken about the gender gap in Silicon Valley. Since she took over YouTube in 2014, she has increased the number of female employees there from 24% to 30%. Over that same time period, the number of women working at Google has grown by just 1% to 31%.

Another woman on our list who is helping other women is newcomer Kirsten Green. Landing 95th on the overall list, Greenbacks female-led startups through her Forerunner Ventures. She’s made savvy investments in companies like Birchbox and Glossier and invested in two companies that had the biggest e-commerce exits in recent years: Jet.com and Dollar Shave Club. Six out of seven of the executives in her firm are women.

Jean Liu, President of Didi Chuxing

In Asia, women are flexing their entrepreneur muscles like never before. According to one study, half of all internet startups in China are run by women. The best example of that is Jean Liu, who debuts on the FORBES Power Women list in 40th place. While she didn’t found the company, since taking over as president of Didi Chuxing, China’s answer to Uber, Liu has been the public face in a hard-fought battle for the Chinese market. Last year she bested Uber’s Travis Kalanick when he agreed to sell Uber’s Chinese operations to Liu for a 20% stake in her company.

It’s just the kind of story to give women in tech hope for the future.

​

Top 18 Most Powerful Women In Tech

No.1: Sheryl Sandberg, COO, Facebook

No.2: Susan Wojcicki, CEO, YouTube

No.3: Ginni Rometty, CEO, IBM

No. 4: Meg Whitman, CEO, HP

No.5: Angela Ahrendts, Senior VP, Apple

No. 6: Safra Catz, Co-CEO, Oracle

No. 7: Ruth Porat, CFO, Alphabet

No. 8: Lucy Peng, Executive Chair, Alibaba

No. 9: Amy Hood, CFO, Microsoft

No. 10: Jean Liu, President, Didi Chuxing

No. 11: Roshni Nadar Malhotra, CEO, HCL Technologies

No. 12: Gwynne Shotwell, COO, SpaceX

No. 13: Solina Cahu Hoi Shuen, Director, Li Ka Shing Foundation

No. 14: Lam Wai Ying, Chair, Biel Crystal

No. 15: Mary Meeker, Partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers

No. 16: Jenny Lee, Managing Partner, GGV Capital

No. 17: Kirsten Green, Founder, Forerunner Ventures

No. 18: Belinda Johnson, Chief of Business Affairs, Airbnb

August 21, 2017

By Ishani Roy

On Monday, the Great American Solar Eclipse will begin in Oregon at 9:05 a.m. local time (12:05 p.m. EDT) and travel diagonally across the country to South Carolina by 2:47 p.m. EDT when the sun would be completely obscured.

You would not want to miss the rare celestial event as it would be the first total solar eclipse to sweep across the United States since 1918. Delving deeper into Monday's solar event, astrologers have said it would have different meanings for different zodiac signs. 

During the total solar eclipse, the disk of the moon blocks out the last sliver of light from the sun, and the sun's outer atmosphere, the corona, becomes visible, according to experts. "It brings people to tears," Rick Fienberg, a spokesperson for the American Astronomical Society, told the space and astronomy news website, Space.com, referring to the experience. "It makes people's jaw drop."

In ancient times, people worshipped the sun and the moon as the celestial bodies were considered "supernatural beings." Their regular and constant movement gave people a sense of order in the universe. So, whenever and whenever, there was a violent and sudden darkening of the sun, people perceived it as a cause for alarm and foreboding.

​

Ancient texts from China, Mesopotamia, and Greece suggest the phenomena [of eclipses] “were just trouble,” Ed Krupp, director of the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles, told Newsweek. “They represented a serious disturbance in the natural order of things.” However, Monday's solar event has caused excitement among the people.

Dr. Athena Perrakis, an astrological expert and owner of Los Angeles-based metaphysical shop Sage Goddess, told  Reader's Digest, eclipses have a great personal impact too. "Eclipse cycles tend to run in 18-month periods," Perrakis said. "And so for people who are trying to understand it personally, they might want to look back first to the last solar eclipse, which happened in March of 2016."

Perrakis also said an eclipse was the best time to "take stock of your life and yourself." "It should be a time of reflection and learning, a time when understanding your past can give you a better concept of your future."

Some astrologers are of the view the solar event would affect some zodiac signs more than the others. Donna Page, a professional astrologer with a graduate degree in counseling psychology, told Women's Health, that Leo and Aquarius were the zodiac signs that would be affected the most.

Eclipses are considered as straight-line events by the astrological experts, which are like flashlight beams shining on the Earth and flashlights do not shine around corners. Planetary aspects such as conjunctions and oppositions are considered the most important by the astrologers in this regard. Consequently, the planets in the constellations — Leo or Aquarius — would be affected the most by the solar event, according to Astrology Hub.

People belonging to either of the two zodiac signs may experience a huge change in their lives such as getting a new job, falling in love at first sight, or even taking a bold decision to move across the country.

Ophira Edut, a professional astrologer and an author of the "The AstroTwins" fame — shared sign-specific horoscopes for the day with the People. "The AstroTwins" — Ophira and her twin sister Tali  — have co-authored four books on astrology. Both the sisters "reach millions worldwide through their spot-on predictions," according to their website astrostylo.com.

Here's how the solar event would affect different zodiac signs, according to Edut.  

Aries

Take a chance on love and don't be afraid to speak up or "put yourself out there."

Taurus

As this is in the home and family part of the charts for Taurus, hence it could imply that there can be a change of address or family.

Gemini

The eclipse is a time when your writing and communication is equipped — a post could go viral. You should also take the time to start having more honest communication, especially with siblings and friends.

Cancer

The eclipse can bring in work and money; you could get a new job or you could also step into a leadership role at the workplace or it could also mean that you take the charge of the budget at home.

Leo

Since this is an eclipse in Leo, it's a powerful time to own your leadership. This is a chance to bring changes to your appearance; you can try becoming more outspoken and visible. You can also make a huge, decisive change in your life.

​

Virgo

The eclipse will mean new beginnings for Virgos. It's a time where you have to let go so that you can welcome new changes in life, be it letting go of control or worrying.

Also, allow someone to support you as Virgos are always helping others but the eclipse is a time when you should learn the power of receiving also.

You can also express leadership through a charitable cause that you believe in.

​

Libra

Be leaders among your friends, social circles, and work. Since you are people pleasers and constantly worry what others think of you, it's time to stop doing that. Also, you should develop more online presence; whatever you do on the Internet could have a huge effect and can also end up going viral.

​

Scorpio

This is a career eclipse and it might bring new opportunities for leadership; a new job, a new position, a new promotion.

​

Sagittarius

This is an eclipse in the ninth house of travel, publishing, and entrepreneurship for Sagittarius. It's a time to be outspoken and let others know of your controversial views. It's also a time for being cross-cultural so take this opportunity to promote tolerance between religions, cultures, ethnic groups.

​

Capricorn

The eclipse is in Capricorns’ house of merging and intimacy. This time could bring a joint business venture or collaboration around a world-bettering issue.

​

Aquarius

This is a relationship eclipse so utilize this time for a new opportunity or a relationship. Focus on taking care of other people.

​

Pisces

This is a time for service, health, and organization for Pisces. Take care of yourself and also try in living a green and a healthy lifestyle...

August 12, 2017

​

The president ignored a reporter's question about the tweet after he signed a defense authorization bill shortly after noon.

The backlash and criticism was near instantaneous, with Gillibrand replying directly to Trump on Twitter. “You cannot silence me or the millions of women who have gotten off the sidelines to speak out about the unfitness and shame you have brought to the Oval Office,” she wrote.

At a news conference later on an unrelated issue, Gillibrand called Trump’s tweet “a sexist smear attempting to silence my voice.”

“I will not be silent on this issue, neither will women who stood up to the president yesterday and neither will the millions of women who have been marching since the Women’s March to stand up against policies they do not agree with,” she added.

Gillibrand once again called on GOP congressional leaders to launch investigations into the allegations made by women against Trump, saying, “It’s the right thing to do, and these allegations should be investigated. They should be investigated thoroughly. That is the right thing to do, and I’m urging them to do that — as should their constituents.”

Asked about her interactions with the president, Gillibrand told reporters that Trump was “just a supporter — a supporter of my first campaign.”

Several Democratic senators also rallied around Gillibrand, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who pointedly asked Trump on Twitter whether he was trying to “bully, intimidate and slut-shame” Gillibrand.

“Do you know who you're picking a fight with?” Warren said. “Good luck with that, @realDonaldTrump.”

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) also weighed in on Twitter, writing that there is “nobody tougher than @SenGillibrand & she won’t be intimidated. Women will continue to speak up.”

Gillibrand was attending a bipartisan Bible study Tuesday morning when Trump's tweet landed, and her phone was immediately filled with supportive and befuddled messages, wondering just what the president was thinking, a Gillibrand aide said.

Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), who was in the Bible study group with Gillibrand, later issued a statement, saying: “Respectful dialogue and disagreement sets a better example for our children and the world. Our leaders should focus on the issues, not personal attacks.”

Gretchen Carlson, the former Fox News personality whose lawsuit against Roger Ailes for sexual harassment led to the resignation of the late network chairman, also weighed in with a duo of tweets defending Gillibrand.

“What do u mean @SenGillibrand would 'do anything' for campaign contributions? By the way she isn’t a lightweight,” she wrote. In a second tweet, Carlson continued: “Sexual harassment is apolitical. Women will not be silenced no matter what party they are in. Period.”

Katty Kay, an anchor for BBC World News America, also took to social media to respond to the president's missive against Gillibrand, casting it in tweets as “clearly sexual” and “demeaning to women.”

“What is so maddening about the Gillibrand tweet is that women can be smart, work hard, become Senator and STILL get sexual c**p thrown at us,” she wrote. “Enough.”

Trump offered no evidence to support his wink-and-nod claim that Gillibrand had gone to him “begging” for campaign donations “and would do anything for them.” In fact, according to Open Secrets, a nonprofit website that tracks campaign contributions, since 1996, Trump has donated $8,900 to Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and $5,850 to Gillibrand.

Gillibrand met with Trump once in 2010, the Gillibrand aide said, and Trump's eldest daughter, Ivanka, who has tried to cast herself as a champion of women, attended the meeting,

On Monday, Gillibrand, a leading voice in Congress for combating sexual assault in the military, became the fifth Democratic senator to call on Trump to step down because of the allegations of sexual misconduct against him — accusations the president has denied and the White House dismissed again on Monday.

“President Trump has committed assault, according to these women, and those are very credible allegations of misconduct and criminal activity, and he should be fully investigated and he should resign,” Gillibrand said on CNN. “These allegations are credible; they are numerous. I've heard these women's testimony, and many of them are heartbreaking.”

She joined Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in calling for Trump's resignation.

Trump has not commented on the male senators' demand that he resign.

On Tuesday, a sixth senator — Democrat Mazie Hirono of Hawaii — called on Trump to resign, citing his morning tweet targeting Gillibrand.

“@realDonaldTrump is a misogynist, compulsive liar, and admitted sexual predator,” she said. “Attacks on Kirsten are the latest example that no one is safe from this bully. He must resign.”

Trump’s attack on Twitter also coincided with a previously scheduled event led by at least 59 female House Democrats, who formally called on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to launch an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct by the president. The oversight panel has the broadest subpoena power and investigatory mandate of any congressional committee. The female lawmakers had requested the investigation in a letter to the committee on Monday.

What Trump tweeted Tuesday “is grotesque, it took my breath away and it represents the conduct of a person who is ill-equipped to be the president of the United States,” Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) said at the news conference.

Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.) said Democrats are seeking “a fair process” to review the allegations and allow the president to respond.

By Tuesday afternoon, more than 100 House Democrats had joined in on the calls to formally investigate Trump after the letter was opened up to male colleagues.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) declined to say whether Congress should investigate allegations of sexual misconduct against Trump, saying, “We’re focused on the Senate,” and that his chamber’s ethics committee can only investigate allegations against senators.

“What we’re in charge of here is the Senate,” McConnell told reporters.

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) defended his Empire State colleague, calling Trump’s attack “nasty” and “unbecoming” of the presidency.

But he declined to join other Democrats calling for a formal investigation of allegations of sexual misconduct of Trump, saying he would let the comments of other Democrats speak for themselves.

Gillibrand, New York's junior senator and a rising political star, is widely considered a likely 2020 presidential candidate against Trump, and the president's Twitter assault Tuesday offered an early glimpse of just how vicious the next race for the White House could become.

Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, called Trump's tweet “disgusting” but also noted, “It will make the Gillibrand folks ecstatic,” implying that the sparring with Trump would raise her profile.

politics

post-politics

Orlando Shooting Updates

News and analysis on the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.

post_newsletter348

follow-orlando

true

endOfArticle

false

Please provide a valid email address.

Sign up

You’re all set!

See all newsletters

true

The story must be told.

Your subscription supports journalism that matters.

Try 1 month for $1

Gillibrand, however, does have her critics. After she said in November that Bill Clinton should have resigned as president after his inappropriate affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky, longtime Hillary Clinton adviser and confidant Philippe Reines excoriated her on Twitter for being ungrateful and two-faced.

“Senate voted to keep POTUS WJC. But not enough for you @SenGillibrand? Over 20 yrs you took the Clintons’ endorsements, money, and seat. Hypocrite. Interesting strategy for 2020 primaries. Best of luck,” Reines wrote.

ll people more about this item. What's it about and what makes it interestin

A state of emergency has been declared after violent clashes in Charlottesville, Virginia.

By Andy Campbell , Christopher Mathias

Three people are dead and at least 35 have been treated for injuries following a white supremacist rally and a helicopter crash in the Charlottesville, Virginia, area.

At one point a car plowed into an anti-racist group amid clashes between white supremacist activists, some armed, and anti-fascist protesters. 

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) declared a state of emergency on Saturday afternoon. 

President Donald Trump blamed “many sides” for the unrest.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a federal investigation into the violence at the rally. The FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Virginia have also launched a civil rights investigation into the fatal car crash.

X

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. ― Thousands of white supremacists and armed militia groups faced off with counter-protesters during a violent and chaotic rally that raged for hours in this Virginia city on Saturday, resulting in the deaths of at least three people.

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D), who declared a state of emergency Saturday afternoon, condemned the violence during a press conference that evening, sending a message to the white supremacists.

“Our message is plain and simple: Go home. You are not wanted in this great commonwealth,” he said. “Shame on you.”

“Please go home and never come back. Take your hatred, and take your bigotry,” McAuliffe added.

Charlottesville Police Chief Al Thomas said 35 people were treated for injuries by city personnel on Saturday, with injuries ranging from minor to life-threatening.

Three people died Saturday, including a 32-year-old woman who was hit by a car that plowed into a group of counter-demonstrators and two others who perished in a helicopter crash near the protests.

James Alex Fields Jr., 20, was arrested in connection with the car incident. He was charged with one count of second-degree murder, three counts of malicious wounding and one count of failing to stop at an accident resulting in a death, police Col. Martin Kumer told HuffPost.

“It was just terrifying,” said 23-year-old Thomas Pilnik, Charlottesville resident who witnesses the crash. “I remember people flying into me, telling me to run and get out of the way and watching people fly like they were just bowling pins.”

Albemarle County Jail

James Alex Fields Jr. is seen in a mug shot following his arrest on Aug. 12.

As of 10 p.m. Eastern on Saturday, police had made three other arrests related to the rally:

JUST IN: Virginia State Police have made three arrests today related to the #Charlottesville rally. Two of the people are from out of state pic.twitter.com/B1ZxtIp7wm

— Lauren Berg (@laurenbergk) August 13, 2017

“You came here today to hurt people and you did hurt people,” McAuliffe said at Saturday’s press conference.

Groups in Charlottesville beat each other with flagpoles and bats, threw punches, chanted slogans and used chemical sprays on each other at a downtown park. Some reporters covering the event were doused in raw sewage.

“There was a cloud,” said a witness, who asked not to be named. “Things were flying. Most people managed to get out of the way.”

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Saturday night that state U.S. Attorney Rick Mountcastle has opened a federal investigation into the violence at the rally, with the full support of the Justice Department.

The state attorney’s office and regional FBI office also announced a civil rights investigation into the circumstances surrounding the deadly car crash.

“The violence and deaths in Charlottesville strike at the heart of American law and justice,” Sessions said in a statement. “When such actions arise from racial bigotry and hatred, they betray our core values and cannot be tolerated.”

Folks said counter protesters were hit by a vehicle as they turned the corner. Medics are here. #Charlottesville pic.twitter.com/qQAIRy7YSN

— ACLU of Virginia (@ACLUVA) August 12, 2017

Andddd Antifa is here #Charlottesville pic.twitter.com/8Hmd1OJHY2

— Christopher Mathias (@letsgomathias) August 12, 2017

The “Unite the Right” rally was promoted by white nationalist Richard Spencer and drew several different groups, including activists from the so-called “alt-right,” Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members and other white supremacists, some of whom dressed in militia uniforms and were openly carrying long guns. Counter-demonstrators and anti-fascist groups also attended.

After demonstrations got heated Friday night, tensions were running high even before the rally officially began at noon, with members of the “alt-right” chanting the Nazi phrase “Blood and soil!” and “White lives matter!” as they marched toward Emancipation Park. With Confederate flags and Nazi memorabilia on full display, they also chanted “Fuck you faggots!”

James Allsup, who was in Charlottesville for the “Unite the Right” rally, told Mediaite that, “white people are tired of being told by the cosmopolitan elites that we are the problem.”

“This is the biggest racist rally in recent memory,” a 23-year-old anti-fascist from Michigan, who wouldn’t give his name, told HuffPost. “And we are all out here opposing these motherfuckers and trying to get a temperature check where the right is ― where the far right is at ― and how they’re organizing, and where we can apply radical strategies to defeat fascism.”

You heard that right. They’re chanting “Fuck you faggots.” 2017. #Charlottesville pic.twitter.com/pMwbSXZ3wW

— Christopher Mathias (@letsgomathias) August 12, 2017

These guys are so young #charlottesville pic.twitter.com/ucMt8E0Vrt

— Andy Campbell (@AndyBCampbell) August 12, 2017

To those demanding photographic evidence of Nazi regalia in #charlottesville, here’s what’s on display before breakfast. Be safe today pic.twitter.com/sbdkgv9eD1

— Andy Campbell (@AndyBCampbell) August 12, 2017

Early Saturday, McAuliffe asked on Twitter for a stop to the violence.

The acts and rhetoric in #Charlottesville over past 24 hours are unacceptable & must stop. A right to speech is not a right to violence.

— Terry McAuliffe (@GovernorVA) August 12, 2017

As violence among the groups grew on Saturday morning, some fled the scene, while others coughed and cried from the chemical sprays. Two fences and a line of cops helped separate the opposing groups, though police did not immediately intervene in the violence.

Police donned riot gear as fights escalated. Meanwhile, hundreds more white supremacists joined in the fray through the afternoon, making their way under a banner hung by the city that read “Diversity makes us stronger.”

Violence erupts #charlottesville pic.twitter.com/yf9qUeGzX2

— Andy Campbell (@AndyBCampbell) August 12, 2017

Those standing on the sidelines were baffled as to why police weren’t immediately stopping the skirmishes.

“If this were Ferguson, riot gear, tear gas, everything would have been used,” said Anthony Bennett, a pastor from Connecticut, referring to the Missouri town where protests broke out in August 2014 after Darren Wilson, at the time a police officer, shot and killed Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager. “There’s a different standard here in Charlottesville.”

More people being sprayed with irritants, not by police #Charlottesville pic.twitter.com/YuNK9RE0xk

— Andy Campbell (@AndyBCampbell) August 12, 2017

Unidentified militia members brandishing guns also showed up at the scene.

Unidentified militia has arrived at #EmancipationPark ahead of the #Charlottesville rally with guns in tow. pic.twitter.com/zCLCBU78PF

— Craig Stanley (@_CraigStanley) August 12, 2017

Just minutes before the planned noon rally was set to begin, police threatened arrest for “unlawful assembly.” Thousands of people began to disperse, but it wasn’t immediately clear where they were going.

Hundreds more Nazis showing up #Charlottesville pic.twitter.com/UjRLgYyYtX

— Christopher Mathias (@letsgomathias) August 12, 2017

Tear gas canisters fly in #charlottesville, not sure if police fired, but they’ve been a non factor so far as fights rage. No answers. pic.twitter.com/xp0h5hBj8w

— Andy Campbell (@AndyBCampbell) August 12, 2017

Eventually, arrests began.

Arrests are being made following declaration of unlawful assembly at Emancipation Park in Charlottesville. #cvilleaug12 pic.twitter.com/6XAn1hYLAS

— VA State Police (@VSPPIO) August 12, 2017

Late Friday night, a white nationalist march at the University of Virginia campus painted a sobering picture of what was to come. A torch-bearing procession of hundreds that included Spencer, at least one man wearing a Nazi SS T-shirt and another carrying a bat, ended with a clash at the campus rotunda where a Thomas Jefferson statue stands. Spencer admitted on Twitter that a group surrounded counter-protesters at the statue. 

Counter-protesters told HuffPost that some among their ranks were then hit with some type of irritant Friday night ― they claim it was Mace, unleashed by the white supremacists. Protesters on the fringe left, who come to these events to battle the fringe right, often try to hide their identities for fear of retaliation.

Some counter-protesters threatened a HuffPost reporter with a gun when he attempted to photograph, from a distance, those recovering from the irritant. 

“Don’t make me use my gun on you,” a woman said, grabbing a holster on her hip.

A #UniteTheRight torch rally ended in violence at the UVa Rotunda. The main rally starts in 12 hours. https://t.co/n8s3hJoKDY

— The Daily Progress (@DailyProgress) August 12, 2017

Punches and torches were thrown during the fracas, but local police eventually dispersed the crowds.

President Donald Trump did little to denounce the white supremacists, instead saying Saturday that “many sides” were responsible for the violence.

“We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides ― on many sides,” Trump said at a ceremony for the signing of a bill to reform the Veterans Affairs health care system. “It’s been going on for a long time in our country, not Donald Trump, not Barack Obama. It’s been going on for a long, long time.” 

Comments from state and local officials addressed the racism more directly.

Charlottesville Mayor Michael Signer spoke out against the white supremacists who gathered in his city.

“They do not agree with the rules of democracy and they are on the losing side of history,” he said during a press conference Saturday evening.

McAuliffe spoke directly to white supremacists during the press conference, reminding them that “we are a nation of immigrants.” McAuliffe said he spoke to Trump on Saturday and told the president he’d be willing to work together, despite their differences, to help prevent this kind of violence in the future.

“There has got to be a movement in this country to bring people together,” McAuliffe said.

The rally Saturday was thinly disguised on Facebook as an event in support of the statue of Gen. Robert E. Lee downtown, which is slated for removal as the city works to respect diverse voices in its telling of American history. It’s part of a nationwide effort to remove Confederate monuments from public property.

Andy Campbell / HuffPost

Nazis came in droves to a rally in Virginia.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, more than 60 Confederate symbols have been removed from city- and state-owned land across the U.S. since avowed white supremacist Dylann Roof massacred nine parishioners at a black church in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015. Most recently, the city of New Orleans toppled four statues honoring the Confederacy.

“These efforts have made us a target for folks around the country who oppose telling the full story of race,” Signer told HuffPost on Friday. “They don’t want the narrative changed or to tell the full story of race. I think this will have the effect of redoubling our progress. To become an honest society, I don’t think we have any choice but to tell the full story.”

The rally’s real purpose, however, shines through in the event’s advertising, which looks a lot like Nazi propaganda and reads like a poorly billed concert:

UNITE THE RIGHT
August 12, 2017
Charlottesville, Virginia pic.twitter.com/ZCqVA3tqA9

— Richard ☝🏻Spencer (@RichardBSpencer) June 17, 2017

Spencer’s followers claimed that that violence was coming to Charlottesville in the form of “roving mobs” of Antifa ― groups of black-clad, masked anti-fascists, anarchists and socialists. It’s a scare tactic that white nationalists use regularly to pull crowds of people to a city in defense of it.

They were able to draw hundreds to Gettysburg over the Fourth of July weekend after claiming members of Antifa were coming to desecrate graves. Antifa never came, but the Ku Klux Klan did, and the only bloodshed came when a lone patriot shot himself in the leg.

The weeks and days leading up to the rally in Charlottesville had the city gearing up for war. The city had seen this type of menacing before: White supremacists showed up with torches at the Lee monument in May, an act that evoked Ku Klux Klan symbolism.

Some businesses closed down Saturday to keep employees safe. Others reportedly opened their doors solely as a safe space in case of an emergency. Some locals were prepared to take drastic measures to protect their city.

“As a lifelong resident of Charlottesville and a mother of two, this is about making the world more equitable for my children,” Leslie Scott-Jones of Solidarity C’Ville wrote in a news release. “I am not naive about the urgent threat of August 12, nor do I believe the threat ends there... My family has been here since the 1700′s, this is my home, and I have no other choice than to protect it.”

This article has been updated with new details, including comments from Trump and anti-fascist demonstrators, information about Fields and information about the various investigations into Saturday’s events.

Sebastian Murdock, Paige Lavender and Carla Herreria contributed to this report.

g? Give people the info they need to go ahead and take the action you want.To make this item your own, click here > Add & Manage Items.

July 10, 2017

By: Brandie Temple, Public Policy FellowPosted on July 10, 2017 Issues: Data on Poverty & Income Poverty & Economic Security

Jobs data for June were released Friday and while the unemployment rate stayed about the same and the economy added about 222,000 jobs last month, things still managed to get worse for women who head families.  We only have data for six months of the new administration and already it would seem Trump’s economy is doing very little to make America great for single-parent families, especially those headed by women.

The unemployment rate for unmarried women who head families was 6.9 percent in June—nearly triple the rate of married men. And since January, the unemployment rate for unmarried women who head families has increased while the unemployment rate for married men has declined.

Job loss has an impact on all families, but for families headed by only one unmarried earner – who is more likely to be a woman – the economic impact is greater. In families with at least one family member unemployed, families headed by unmarried women are more likely (49.9 percent) than families headed by unmarried men (41.5 percent) and married couple families (19.6 percent) to have no family member employed.

One in three single mother families lived in poverty in 2015 and over half of all poor children (56.2 percent) lived in families headed by unmarried women. More than half a million single women with children (11.2 percent) held full time jobs in 2015 and still lived in poverty. This is in part because working mothers are overrepresented in lower paying occupations and are especially hit hard by the wage gap. For example cashiers and retail sales are a top occupation for mothers, where their median wage is about $10.32 an hour—50 cents to every dollar paid to fathers in the same job, working the same number of hours each week.

Trump’s economy so far has not made things so great for single mothers, and his ill-conceived tax plan will only make it worse.

Though Trump has provided very little detail about his tax plan, we do know he’s proposed eliminating the head of household filing status for single parents and other single adults.  Currently, single parents who pay for more than half of household expenses can file head of household, as opposed to filing as single, which reduces the amount of tax they owe by allowing them to take a larger standard deduction. The president’s proposed plan to eliminate the head of household filing status would mean a drastic tax hike on single-parent households. For example, it’s been estimated that a single parent making $50,000 a year with three school-age children and no child care costs could end up paying $1,188 more come tax day—the equivalent of about two months’ worth of childcare or two months’ worth of groceries for a family of four.

Eliminating the head of household filing status is unequivocally a tax hike on single-parent families, the vast majority of which (75 percent) are headed by women. According to most recent Census data, 76 percent of those who filed as head of household on their taxes were women, more than a third of whom were mothers with children under 5 years of age.*

As this month’s jobs data highlights, coupled with higher unemployment, lower wages, and a big wage gap, these tax hikes could be devastating for single moms and their bottom line.

*CPS data available via IPUMS. These data are self reported and will differ from IRS data on the actual number of people filing specific tax status. 

our own, click here > Add & Manage Items.