# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Beyoncé - I Was Here (United Nations World Humanitarian Day Performance Video)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Race and gender are two major concepts misunderstood in today's society. Moreover, many people want to avoid the concept of race and gender altogether, yet the idea of these concepts percolates through virtually every economic, political, and social aspect in our country. Furthermore, race has been defined as a concept with real biological difference; it has been defined at one time or another by physical features such as skin color, facial features, and hair texture. Likewise, dominant groups have also used "race" to justify reasons for inequality, to state that one "race" is more dominant or better than the other. However, scientists have proven that humans are biologically the same and race is not determined by biology but by social constructs. It is determined by how one perceives oneself. Gender is also a topic that is misunderstood by people in our society. Sex is determined by biological traits, predominantly the reproductive organs, that society then uses to place people in two categories male or female. However, sex does not determine one's gender. Gender is usually associated with societal norms and what society determines is appropriate roles for one sex over the other to have. However, gender is determined by how one personally identifies himself/herself, and often times sex does not match up with how a person identifies themselves.

Madison Field's Personal Experience: Furthermore, we as a society, make a habit of assuming and deducing based on pre-established ideas. The way you dress determines how successful you are, not your tastes. The way you speak determines how intelligent you are, not your education. We make the same assumptions in gender. From personal anecdotes, I can attest to gender roles in the dance community, namely ballroom. I've been in the culture for over a year and have found myself beginning to assume certain ideas that aren't always true. A prime example is the lead-follow system in ballroom; leads are men, follows are women. While this is a widely accepted, social construct based on gender, it doesn't not mean it holds true to all dancers. Some women find leading more enjoyable, and vise versa for men. However, this doesn't change the fact that the norm is gender specific.

Moreover, in the past it has been a societal norm that women are to be the homemakers. They are in charge of cooking, cleaning, and staying at home to raise children while men go off to work everyday to make money and bring home the "bread". However, as our society has changed, it seems as though women are now being pressured to not only perform the roles they have done in the past but to also have a successful career. As I have gotten older, I have personally felt this pressure not only from my family , but also from educators as well. It seems as though our society expects women to have a successful professional career and still be able to raise three children at the same time in the traditional way they have been raised in the past. While many women can and have done this, our society has created this image of a "perfect women", who needs do all these things, when in reality it is rarely achieved. Similarly, race is an ongoing debate in our country and because America is a melting pot for many different peopl Kate McDonough's Personal Experience: e from all over the world, one cannot determine the race of someone just based on their physical features. In my lifetime, a person who is a great example of this is our president, Barack Obama. Obama has a white mother and Kenyan father, and many people would classify him as an African American; however, there is a large amount of people who view him as a "mixed" or biracial. This discrepancy is caused by two different groups in our society with different ideas and views. Therefore, this is a prime example of how race is culturally constructed not biologically determined.

Tyi'teanna Seaborn's Personal Experience: In my life I have also experienced gender discrimination as a young woman. I have come across situations where I'm being told to stay in a "woman's place." I have been told that I couldn't do certain things because I was a girl, and that I should choose a certain career path because the one I was interested in was predominantly centered around males. I realized though that by "staying in your place," you begin to fall victim to our society's stereotypical lifestyle.

My personal experience of gender social constructs consists of behavioral observations in my everyday family life growing up. My family consists of three other brothers and one sister. Growing up, my brothers and I did all the physical labor around the house. We took care of the yard, took the trash out each week, and participated in sports every day. My mother took care of all of the cooking, cleaning, and taking care of all of the children. My sister didn't display much William Boston's Personal experience: responsibility because of her age; however, she did help cook from time to time. In today's society, we display these certain gender roles in the majority of American households. These gender roles have been around for quite sometime, on the other hand, we have seen women's ability to partake in extensive physical labor throughout our history. While men went to fight in the world wars, women took over the roles of men temporarily. Women took part in producing income through physical labor intensive jobs, and they also took care of the children. So, we have seen women partake in "roles" that men are supposed to be responsible for.

Emory Donelson's personal experience: In our minds, we fix certain stereotypes with the color of a person's skin, and consequently the socially classified race they are apart of. This is the result of hundreds and hundreds of years of a socially constructed idea of race. These stereotypes get passed down generation to generation and it leaves us with the ideas we grew up with today. As a child, I grew up in a society that thought this way. I have learned that these views put people, typically non-white, at a disadvantage throughout life. It means less job opportunities which in turn dominoes into low income, poor neighborhood; therefore, this tragedy gets passed down to their children. Living in a low-income neighborhood could mean poor education for those children, and the cycle would further continue. It becomes a necessity to create some kind of income to support a family; it just so happens illegal substances is the quickest way to make a good amount of money. This is the social stereotype of an African-American drug dealer. Sadly, even though just a stereotype, this does happen. The social construct of race has consequently limited this family's lifestyle.

In conclusion, through the personal experiences that have been listed above, it is evident that race and gender are both socially constructed concepts and not determined by biological evidence.

Group Members how participate: Kate, William, Emory, Madison, and Tyi'teanna

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Social Construction of Gender and Race L17

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Race and gender are two major concepts misunderstood in today's society. Moreover, many people want to avoid the concept of race and gender altogether, yet the idea of these concepts percolates through virtually every economic, political, and social aspect in our country.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article was posted in Gender

Posted by Mey on

Time and time again, transmisogynists and transphobes go back to that old excuse that they are just standing up for the reality of "biological sex" when they spew their ignorance and hate. They say that no matter what a trans woman does, no matter what she believes, she's still actually a man. Others cede the fact that trans women are women, but stop there and say "gender is what's between your ears, sex is what's between your legs" and therefore trans women are still males. Although this is a popular idea, it is based on a misunderstanding of biology, social constructs and anatomy, and it needs to stop.

A lot of this misuse of the idea of "biological sex" has, unfortunately, been centered around discussions of activist and Orange is the New Black actress Laverne Cox. Cox recently became the first out trans person ( Chelsea Manning was on the cover before she came out) to be on the cover of Time Magazine. However, inside the magazine, Time said that an easy way to gain some understanding of trans people is to realize that gender and sex are two different things. They say that "sex is biological, determined by a baby's birth anatomy" and then go on to call trans women "biological males" and trans men "biological females."

They are trying to good allies, explaining what many see as a complicated issue, but what they are really doing is using a simplistic and outdated understanding of biology to perpetuate some very dangerous ideas about trans women. This type of dialogue allows people to think that they are doing trans people a service, when really they are just continuing to see them as something other than "real women."

Another article about Cox came out at about the same time. This one, however, was very upfront about using what its author thinks is a good understanding of biology to claim that trans women are not even women at all. Written by Kevin D. Williamson for the National Review and later republished by the Chicago Sun-Times ( who then removed it and issued an apology), this article is called "Laverne Cox is Not a Woman" and aggressively uses Williamson's complete misunderstanding of "biological sex" (and yes, I'm using scare quotes on purpose) to misgender not only Cox, but all other trans people. He says that we need to pay attention to the "biological reality" of sex instead of the delusional world that trans people are living in.

In the article, Williamson says that (get ready for some extreme ignorance and hate here) we are experiencing a new transgender phenomenon, one where we have lost grip on reality. He says that we have an "obsession with policing language (that is based) on the theory that language mystically shapes reality..." However, just because we say trans women are women, that, according to him, doesn't change the fact that they are men.

He instead calls Cox "an effigy of a woman," based on his belief that sex is a biological reality and "is not subordinate to subjective impressions..." He adds that "No hormone injection or surgical mutilation is sufficient to change that." He seems to believe that sex as we describe it is a thing that just exists, that a clear, inarguable and binary definition for sex just springs forth from nature. Unfortunately, Williamson isn't alone in this type of rhetoric. There's actually a wide group of people, some "allies," some lawmakers and some just outright bigots who all rally behind the idea of using the social construct of "biological sex" to misgender trans women.

The thing people like Williamson want to cling to the most is the idea that sex is an immutable, universal biological reality that is therefore easy to categorize. Although many are willing to call trans women women (or specifically "trans women" or "transwomen" or even "male women"), they say that that is just their gender. They argue that gender is cultural and that sex is an unchanging biological fact, and that therefore their sex is still male. This is used to support "Womyn born Womyn" spaces, create fear around so-called "bathroom bills," disallow trans women from competing in women's sports and even defend violence against trans women.

Since "biological sex" is actually a social construct, those who say that it is not often have to argue about what it entails. Some say it's based on chromosomes (of which there are many non-XX/XY combinations, as well as diversity among people with XY chromosomes), others say it's genitals or gonads (either at birth or at the moment you're talking about), others say it's hormone levels (which vary widely and can be manipulated), still others say it's secondary sex characteristics like the appearance of breasts, body hair and muscle mass (which vary even more). Some say that it's a combination of all of them. Now, this creates a huge problem, as sex organs, secondary sex characteristics and hormone levels aren't anywhere close to being universal to all men or women, males or females.

Those who claim that sex is determined by chromosomes must not realize that sex is assigned at birth not by chromosomes, not even by gonads, but by genitals. In fact, the vast majority of us never learn what our sex chromosomes are. Sex isn't something we're actually born with, it's something that doctors or our parents assign us at birth. So if sex is determined by genitals, they must be clearly binary and unchangable, right? Wrong. Genitals can be ambiguous at birth and many trans people get gender confirmation surgery to change them. Neither chromosomes nor genitals are binary in the way that "biological sex" defenders claim they are, and the vast majority of measures by which we judge sex are very much changable.

It's pretty bizarre that we place so much importance on an assumption that doctors make when we're born. A doctor took one look at me the moment I was born and that's supposed to determine what bathroom I use, what sports I play or really anything else about my current life? We don't hold adults to those standards in other aspects of their lives, so why do we with this one?

While it is true that gender and sex are different things, and that gender is indeed a social construct, sex isn't the Ultimate Biological Reality that transphobes make it out to be. There's nothing intrinsically male about XY chromosomes, testosterone, body hair, muscle mass or penises. If an alien civilization found earth, they wouldn't look at a person with a penis and say "Oh, that must be a male, sex based on genitalia is the One Universal Constant." Sex, like gender, is indeed socially constructed and can be changed.
Are you following us on Facebook?
If sex isn't the All Mighty Binary Universal Constant that some people think it is, why do they place so much importance on it? The easy answer is that it gives them an excuse to misgender and exclude trans people, and specifically trans women. They can pretend they're just standing up for science, but they're really just saying that trans women aren't fully women and that trans men aren't fully men. People need to start learning about what sex really is and what social constructs really are. People need to stop misusing biology and spreading ignorance and misunderstanding. People need to stop looking for excuses for their anti-trans bigotry. All of this needs to stop and it needs to stop now.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
It's Time For People to Stop Using the Social Construct of "Biological Sex" to Defend Their Transmisogyny

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Chicago Sun-Times recently republished a hateful and ignorant article claiming that Laverne Cox is a man due the "biological reality" of sex. Unfortunately, this essentialist, simplistic and just plain incorrect understanding of sex is often used against trans people.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Washington state legislator is using his life experience with sex abuse to sponsor a bill that would eliminate the statute of limitations for certain felony sex crimes, including molestation and child rape. House Bill 1155 was introduced in January 2017 and, if passed into law, would allow the offender to be prosecuted at any time after commission of the crime.

We think this bill should be passed into law.

It's all too often we read about victims of sex abuse and their journey to gain closure. What about the victims that choose to remain silent for years, how do they find closure?

Being the victim of sexual assault is traumatizing enough, but unfortunately for some it can take years to gain the courage to report the crime. This means sometimes the offender may go free.

Currently, the statute of limitations in Washington state for first- or second-degree rape expires after 10 years, if reported to law enforcement. If the incident is not reported, the statute is reduced down to just 3 years. In the case of a child, a crime may be prosecuted up to 3 years after the victim turns 18 years old, or up to 10 years after the offense, if reported.

Several other sexual-related felonies - including certain degrees of molestation, voyeurism and indecent liberties - have a 3-year statute of limitations. The 3-year limitation seems to be a common time frame for many felony sex crimes, and for some people this just isn't enough time. As a result, some believe the current statutes keep victims from reporting an incident.

RAINN, (Rape, abuse and incest national network) the nation's largest anti-sexual violence organization, reports that every 98 seconds someone is sexually assaulted and every 8 minutes the victim is a child. Unfortunately, only six of every 1,000 rapists end up in prison for their crimes. What's more shocking is that two out of three sex crimes go unreported altogether.

There are many reasons victims choose to not report a crime. Some keep the secret out of fear of "reliving the incident" or believe law enforcement may not help. According to RAINN, at least 23 percent of victims believed the police wouldn't be of any assistance toward capturing the perpetrator. These statistics are very concerning. You cannot help but wonder how this bill will affect the future.

If the statute of limitations was eliminated, would more crimes be reported, therefore potentially capturing would-be repeat offenders? We think so.

For years, lawmakers across the nation have been debating whether to eliminate the statute of limitations on sex crimes, but some think the existing laws are fine as is.

Just a few years ago, a professor at Temple University's Beasley School of Law was quoted saying "it's really a matter of fairness. If there's going to be a prosecution or a lawsuit, it should happen promptly after the event so the person has a fair opportunity to put together a defense. The evidence may be stale, memories may have faded."

Everyone deserves the right to a fair trial, but don't the victims deserve closure? What if the crime was reported to law enforcement and the offender evaded capture?

Many of us know of someone that's been affected by a sexual-related crime. The statistics are certainly disheartening. The good news is more states are jumping on board to abolish statutes of limitations for felony sex crimes. Roughly 17 states have moved forward with similar laws.

Just last year, California eliminated its statute of limitations for almost every type of sex crime. State Sen. Connie Leyva said, "the bill signaled to every victim that they matter and that, regardless of when they are ready to come forward, they will always have the opportunity to seek justice in a court of law. Rapists should never be able to evade legal consequences simply because an arbitrary time limit has expired."

California's bill is said to be partially inspired by the allegations against Bill Cosby. Several women have come forward claiming sexual assault, but the statute of limitations made it impossible to prosecute.

We believe this bill could certainly change lives. It would give hope to victims that want to see their perpetrator captured without watching the clock. House Bill 1155 has passed the House by a vote of 90-8. Now it's off to the Senate for review.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Washington state legislator is using his life experience with sex abuse to sponsor a bill that would eliminate the statute of limitations for certain felony sex crimes, including molestation and child rape. House Bill 1155 was introduced in January 2017 and, if passed into law, would allow the offender to be prosecuted at any time after commission of the crime.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At the 2015 Triumph Awards which aired on Oct. 8, rapper T.I took the stage in a performance criticizing hashtag activism by saying it's not enough to just get a topic trending on Twitter.

He performed a spoken word piece titled "United We Stand"which is believed to be a follow up piece to his open letter addressing the unrest in Ferguson after the shooting death of Michael Brown an unarmed African- American teenager.

According to the Huffington Post, T.I said, "Our society's issues are deeper than social media posts, there's a long list and if you think solely making them a trending topic is going to solve them, then you are a part of the problem."

Hashtag activism, a term believed to be coined during the Occupy Wall Street movement, is the act of using a hashtag to help promote or support a specific cause on social media. Hashtag activism has served as an igniter for the #BlackLivesMatter and #ALSIceBucketChallenge movements, among others.

Proponents of hashtag or digital activism say that it's an effective way to spread a message to the masses. Critics, on the other hand, say these movements do not create tangible results.

In 2014, a Digital Activism study conducted by Cone Communications reported 75% of Millennials uses social media to discuss issues they care about. The same study also found that 58% of Americans considers tweeting information about issues an effective form of advocacy or support.

Teghan Simonton, a freshman at Waynesburg University, says hashtag activism allows everyone's voice to be heard.

"It helps the politicians and people in power know what everybody is thinking about at different levels," says Simonton.

A 2013 study on the effectiveness of digital activism, conducted by Philip Howard of the University of Washington found that people are civically engaged online.

Critics of digital activism refer to the trend as "slacktivism" or "clicktivism" arguing that online support isn't backed by real-life actions. Howard refutes this claim, saying small acts of support are just as important.

"The clicks are like a gateway to other political acts," says Howard. "Just because these small acts of liking something don't always translate into massive protests doesn't mean that they're empty of political meaning."

Howard's statement about clicks being gateways to other political acts is supported by the Cone Communications study, which states 64% of Americans who 'like' organizations or causes on social media are likely to engage in the organization by donating money, volunteering, etc.

Many digital campaigns tout spreading 'awareness' as a giant success. But Jon St. Laurent, a senior at Waynesburg University, is among critics of hashtag activism, saying that action must be the end result of an 'awareness' campaign.

"We're past the point of needing to raise awareness about these things," said St. Laurent. "Everyone as a community as a whole actually needs to do something."

Critics often cite #Kony2012 or #BringBackOurGirls as failed social media campaigns. These campaigns both garnered worldwide attention but failed to create real change.

Washington Post reporter, Adam Taylor, wrote "Many of these social media campaigns have faced a similar problem to #Kony2012: Once you have the online support, how to use it for real world impact? It's an important question, and if an answer could be found it may point to better things."

But there have been campaigns that have produced tangible results. For example, the #ALSIceBucketChallenge successful raised over $100 million dollars for ALS research. To participate, people - including celebrities, politicians and famous athletes - dumped buckets of icy water on themselves.

Another popular hashtag campaign, the #BlackLivesMatter movement was started online by three women after the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed African American teenager. In 2014, the movement was reignited with the deaths of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri and Eric Garner in New York City. Since 2014, it has caught fire garnering the attention of students, politicians, political pundits and even President Obama.

John Wicker, a junior at Waynesburg University, says he thinks the #BlackLivesMatter campaign has been effective by forcing society to have important conversations.

"I think for the longest time we've been really blind to our color blindness," says Wicker. "It has brought forth very important conversations and I think it's actually digging up something that need to be resolved in our communities and in our families."

But Wicker recognizes the merit in T.I's argument by saying it's important to take it a step further than simply using a hashtag. Online activism must be accompanied with real life actions and support.

"If you're really concerned about justice you should be figuring out how am I going to reach out to people who are isolated?" says Wicker. "How am I going to be bridging those gaps....am I going to affirm the dignity of others?"

Howard says he believes that nothing will replace in-person protests or demonstrations but digital activism is an effective way to get people engaged in a dialogue about the issues. For many, hashtag activism is a good place to start.

Take Our Poll

Nika Anschuetz is a student at Waynesburg University and a fall 2015 USA TODAY Collegiate Correspondent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Ramsey Touchberry, University of Florida

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is hashtag-based activism all talk, no action?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At the 2015 Triumph Awards which aired on Oct. 8, rapper T.I took the stage in a performance criticizing hashtag activism by saying it's not enough to just get a topic trending on Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Though first introduced in 1923, the last time the country really paid attention to the ERA was in the 1970s and early '80s, before Hager was even born. That was when feminist activists brought the issue to a boil. But after failing to secure the required number of state ratifications to pass the ERA by its 1982 deadline, the campaign was reduced to a low simmer.

These days, though, it seems the fight for women's equality is heating up.

Just look toward Tinseltown. Emma Watson's now-famous September speech to the United Nations about feminism was watched millions of times. The hack of emails at Sony Pictures revealed pervasive Hollywood gender wage gaps. And then there was Patricia Arquette's recent Oscar acceptance speech for her role as a struggling single mom in "Boyhood." She took to the podium, calling out for equal pay and rights for women in the United States, and inspired a social media frenzy -- not to mention enthusiastic cheers from Meryl Streep. In a backstage interview, Arquette specifically raised the need for the constitutional amendment.

Meantime, there's a new book and soon-to-be completed documentary about the ERA, both titled "Equal Means Equal." And, in the midst of these coordinated efforts, lawmakers who've sponsored previous attempts to resurrect the ERA plan to publicly stand together at the U.S. Capitol when they reintroduce their bills in the coming weeks.

Sure to be there cheering them on will be activists like Hager, millennial women inspired by those who've walked before them. The question hanging over them: Will this time be different?

Necessity or waste of time?

A toasty and crowded wood-paneled room, high up in Manhattan's Yale Club, buzzes with experience and credentials.

Taking a break from writing her latest book is Gloria Steinem, arguably the most recognized name and face in feminist activism. Walking by is Robin Morgan, a poet and writer whose 1970 anthology, "Sisterhood is Powerful," helped galvanize a movement. Shaking hands is Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney of New York, who has been introducing the ERA in every congressional session since 1997.

Others in the room are high-powered attorneys, heads of foundations and nonprofits, local government insiders. Since the time of the last ERA push, the percentage of women in the workforce has grown. In 1970, nearly half of mothers stayed home. As of 2012, less than 30% do, according to the Pew Research Center. That shift helps drive a tide of interest in equal opportunities and pay, supporters say.

Women who work full-time earn 78 cents for every dollar earned by their male counterparts, a raise of just about 19 cents since President John F. Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act of 1963. For women of color, the picture is worse, with black women making 64 cents and Latinas making 56 cents for every dollar earned by a white man.

The face of ERA opposition during the last big go-round isn't swayed by such figures; in fact, she calls them lies. Phyllis Schlafly, the 90-year-old conservative activist who founded the Eagle Forum, insists gender-neutral employment law already protects women doing equal work with equal experience.

The ERA is "dumb and offensive," she tells me in a phone call. And a new push for it is "a colossal waste of time."

Schlafly once warned that the ERA would lead to same-sex marriage and women being drafted into combat. She also said it would threaten families, an argument she still makes. She touts the virtues of the traditional nuclear family with a gender-division of duty, wherein husbands provide and wives focus on the home and children.

"But didn't you go to law school? Weren't you a lawyer?" I ask.

"I only went to law school to irritate the feminists," she says with a laugh.

Schlafly also was interviewed by Kamala Lopez, the actress, director and activist who established the ERA Education Project and is behind the forthcoming documentary, "Equal Means Equal."

She told Lopez, "Women like the pay gap." And she talked about hypergamy, the notion of marrying up, saying if a man doesn't earn as much as a woman, it is a "deterrent to marriage."

The women gathered at the Yale Club in New York scoff when they hear Schlafly's name. They care about issues beyond gender roles and pay equity. They chat over wine and hors d'oeuvres about the injustice of piled-up, untested rape kits. They voice outrage that National Football League star Ray Rice was not prosecuted in New Jersey for assaulting his then-fiancée. They commiserate with each other about ways they still must educate trial lawyers and judges about sexual harassment and assault cases, offering examples like, "No, you can't ask if her skirt was too high."

Weaving past these women and men -- mostly older feminists with deep pockets -- is Hager. She, too, has come here this biting-cold January evening to support the ERA Coalition and celebrate the release of the new book, "Equal Means Equal: Why the Time for an Equal Rights Amendment is Now," written by the coalition's founder and president -- and Hager's colleague -- Jessica Neuwirth.

A women's rights lawyer, Neuwirth established the international organization Equality Now and was a director in the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. She's spent much of her career focused on Africa, steeped in cases of genocide, sexual violence and war crimes.

She met Maloney years back during discussions about sex trafficking, and the congresswoman approached her about taking up the ERA charge. Neuwirth, 53, says she welcomes the chance to work on something close to home and, in her mind, so positive and unambiguous.

Using court cases as examples, Neuwirth sets out in her book to answer why the ERA is necessary, addressing the question she hears so often from people who assume that it already passed or that women's rights are already covered by existing laws and constitutional language.

"It was literally just a handful of votes that stopped the ERA," she tells the group assembled in New York. "Surely with social media and the new generation of women and men who do not believe in second-class citizenship for women, we can get the ERA across the finish line and put it in the Constitution where it belongs."

Those around her cheer, but opponents more contemporary than Schlafly bristle at the idea of women seeing themselves as victims.

A Tumblr site and Facebook page dedicated to "Women Against Feminism" feature young women brandishing their own versions of that argument. "If I experience sexism, I stand up for myself and move on," writes one woman. "Bitching about it will get me nowhere."

Others warn of unanticipated fallout if the ERA passes. Parents who enroll their children in single-sex schools or organizations like the Girl Scouts or Boy Scouts may lose that choice, says Sabrina Schaeffer, executive director of the Independent Women's Forum.

Ongoing claims about a wage gap are overblown and speak more to women's choices than to discrimination, says Schaeffer, whose organization counts Lynne Cheney, the wife of former Vice President Dick Cheney, among its supporters.

"Women would be far better served by having an honest conversation about the things they hope to achieve and the choices they're making along the way, from their college major to if they want to take time out of the workplace," Schaeffer wrote me in an email, "than any kind of legislation which would make women more expensive to hire and ultimately less attractive to businesses."

Arguments like these leave Neuwirth baffled.

"Anyone who says that paying women equally and treating them equally in the workplace makes it more expensive for businesses to hire them ... is saying in effect that women are worth less than men," she says. "Equality in the workplace is not just the right thing to do, it's the smart thing for business and a good thing for men as well as women."

People often assume women's rights are secure thanks to the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment, Neuwirth says. That amendment was adopted in 1868. The mere fact that it took another five decades for women to get the right to vote, she says, proves the clause wasn't about them.

And laws bearing names like the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Equal Pay Act and Violence Against Women Act may sound great, but they're not ironclad guarantees of protection.

In her book, Neuwirth outlines stories of women who have tested the power of federal statutes. One had been raped in college, only to see an admitted attacker go unpunished. Another took out a restraining order against her violent husband, who went on to kill their three daughters. In both instances, the women sued authorities for failing to act and took their cases all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, only to be told there was no constitutional basis for their protection.

Other court decisions have justified unequal pay for identical work, as well as the firing of women from jobs they were still capable of doing simply because they got pregnant.

Women who think their interests are sufficiently protected, Neuwirth tells the Yale Club gathering, have been duped by a fairy tale.

"Who would know that better," she says, "than Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia?" She cites what he told California Lawyer in a January 2011 issue: "Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't."

A battle rich in history

Last April, Scalia appeared at the National Press Club beside his judicial polar opposite -- and friend -- Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The two were asked how they would amend the Constitution, if they could.

The Notorious R.B.G., as she is sometimes referred to these days, didn't hesitate.

"If I could choose an amendment to add to this Constitution, it would be the Equal Rights Amendment," she said.

"What do you mean by that?" asked the moderator, Marvin Kalb.

"It means that women are people equal in stature before the law," she said. "We have achieved that through legislation, but legislation can be repealed. It can be altered. ... That principle belongs in our Constitution. It is in every constitution written since the Second World War."

When her granddaughters pick up the U.S. Constitution, Ginsburg added, she'd "like them to see that that is a basic principle of our society."

The idea of an Equal Rights Amendment in the United States isn't new. It was the brainchild of Alice Paul, a suffragist leader who fought hard to pass the 19th Amendment, earning women the right to vote in 1920.

Believing that wasn't enough to end discrimination, Paul then drafted the ERA and introduced it to Congress in 1923.

From then until 1970, the amendment was presented during every congressional session. Over the years, it enjoyed bipartisan support. For decades it stayed on the Republican platform. But it rarely made it out of committee. A growing women's movement in the late '60s and early '70s set out to change that.

In 1972, the ERA passed by the necessary two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate, was endorsed by President Richard Nixon and then sent to state legislatures for ratification.

The key language, tweaked from Paul's original version, read:
Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
To pass an amendment, three-quarters of the states -- or 38 of them -- must ratify it. There was a deadline tied to this effort, though; at first seven years, then extended to 10. By the time 1982 rolled around, 35 states had ratified the ERA. The amendment failed to pass, falling three states short.

The fight on the national stage grew quiet, but the ERA has been reintroduced every congressional session since then. With the exception of 1983, when House representatives voted on it once more, the ERA has never again made it out of committee and onto the floor for a vote.

Rep. Maloney hopes this year will shift the tide.

"I spend 75% if not more of my time fighting to hold on to what we [women] already have, not advancing to the next level," Maloney says. "This is going to be the decade of the woman. We need to pass it by 2020 and finish the job."

The last time the U.S. Constitution was amended was 1992. The 27th Amendment prohibits members of Congress from giving themselves pay raises during the session in which they are currently serving.

That amendment was introduced by James Madison and sent to the states for ratification in 1789. More than 202 years later, it passed.

When Maloney and her colleagues reintroduce the ERA, they will present two strategies.

Democratic Rep. Jackie Speier of California and Democratic Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland will introduce legislation to lift the 1982 deadline -- a hurdle clearly not faced when it came to the 27th Amendment. That would put the ERA three states shy of success.

Maloney will propose starting the ERA process from scratch. Embattled Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey, who took up the charge after Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy died, is expected to do the same.

There's no downside in pitching both strategies at once, they all say. The lawmakers are not in competition. They're just trying different approaches to see what will take.

The need, they say, is as evident today as ever. While more than 80% of countries guarantee gender equality in their constitutions, the UCLA's WORLD Policy Analysis Center found, 32 do not, including the United States.

Facing the opponent early

A sign on the wall reads, "An equal society is a happy one." Gathered are about 20 members of a local feminism club. Some rush to finish their lunches of burgers, greasy fries and salads, hinting at their busy schedules.

Hager usually spends her days building relationships, talking to staffers on the Hill and joining constituents in meetings with lawmakers. She crafts fact sheets, beats the ERA drum via social media and volunteers for speaking engagements.

Often that means talking to groups of adults. Today, though, most of her audience isn't old enough to vote.

She has taken her women's history lesson and message to a posh Washington-area private academy, The Field School, where she's been invited to address a room full of teens -- including Jessica Neuwirth's nephew.

"I'm not sure if anyone knows who Justice Scalia is," Hager says near the top of her talk, gearing up to share his oft-repeated quote.

"I play tennis with him!" a boy blurts out. "He goes to our club."

The unexpected answer leaves Hager stunned and smiling. The only answer she can come up with: "Well, can you tell him to help us out?"

The students want to know what they can do, beyond hit up a Supreme Court justice for support.

"There is so much creativity in your minds, and we need to find ways to reach out," Hager tells them.

"That ice bucket thing [for ALS] took off so fast," says James Barringer, 15, Neuwirth's nephew and the brains behind a Facebook group called Boys and Men for the ERA. "Maybe we can come up with something like that?"

One student fixates on the ERA's language and suggests it should read "regardless of assigned or perceived gender or sex," rather than just "regardless of sex." Another asks about the new movement's greatest opposition.

"The main opponent we face is lack of knowledge," Hager says. "Seven out of 10 Americans think we already have it. Nine out of 10 think we should have it. Why don't we have it? Because seven out of 10 think we do."

Dozens of organizations are active in the ERA Coalition: A Call to Men, the YWCA, the National Congress for Black Women, to name a few. They may have representatives enlisted to work on the cause, but the ERA is Hager's one and only focus.

Beyond her job, Hager co-chairs the ERA Task Force of the National Council of Women's Organizations. Her partner in this effort -- and one of her mentors -- is 72-year-old Roberta "Bobbie" Francis. While so many women her age burned out or moved on after the 1982 deadline, Francis remained engaged.

In 1981, she wrote a flier, "Why We Need the ERA," which was nationally distributed by the League of Women Voters. But Francis got involved a little late and wasn't on the front lines. "I joined a marathon at the 13th mile," she says. Maybe that's why she's lasted. Or maybe it's simply her personality?

"I think the word you're looking for is bullheaded," she says with a laugh. Whatever the case, she's kept on.

Francis established and runs equalrightsamendment.org, a repository for all things ERA. And it was she who recommended Hager for the ERA Coalition position when Neuwirth began looking.

It's no small responsibility to Hager.

"If I mess up on the Hill, I could hurt 51% of the population," she says. "Why do you think I'm so hard on myself? I take it very seriously."

Jolted to attention

At the popular Tortilla Coast on Capitol Hill, Hager sits down for a lunch of fajitas, chips and guacamole surrounded by half a dozen colleagues-in-the-cause she counts as friends. All these women, with the exception of one, were born after 1982 -- and into a world where rallying cries for the ERA had been reduced to a whisper.

Most of them, including Hager, were jolted to attention in college when they took women's studies courses. That's how they first learned there was no ERA and nothing in the U.S. Constitution to specifically protect them as women.

"Wait, what? Are you sure?" Kristina Romines, 25, the field coordinator for the National Organization for Women (NOW), remembers saying as she exchanged wide-eyed stares with other startled students. "I almost asked my professor to double check."

It's the sort of WTF response they say they hear from peers, women and men alike, over and over. And it matches what polls have shown.

A 2001 survey conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation showed that 96% of U.S. adults believe women and men should have equal rights, and 72% believe the Constitution already guarantees those rights.

The problem, ERA proponents say, is that this simply isn't true. That the ERA isn't already in the Constitution strikes these women as ludicrous. It should be a no-brainer, they say.

These women thank their fathers, who were their cheerleaders. At least one speaks of being raised by a single mother, another by a single father after her mother died young. Several mention husbands who share the load at home -- and share their outrage.

They talk about how to stir up widespread support, the importance of education, the need for constituents to contact their members of Congress. And they find hope in what's brewing around them: The growing efforts to address sexual assault on college campuses. The higher-than-ever number of women in Congress. The fact that a woman is one party's presumed presidential nominee.

They shake their heads about the hypocrisy of the United States pushing other nations -- including Afghanistan -- to protect women in their constitutions while not doing the same at home. While they applaud how same-sex marriage is poised to be protected by the highest court, they are a bit dumbfounded that the same court says it has no constitutional basis to protect them. Frankly, they feel like they got passed over.

"Societally, our generation is there," insists Chitra Panjabi, 30, NOW's membership vice president. "The structure needs to catch up."

While ratifying the ERA would certainly be symbolic -- a statement to the nation and the world that women in America matter -- these activists insist the need is real.

Just look at the recent flood of state legislation meant to chip away at reproductive rights, they say. See how religious freedoms trumped women's rights when the Supreme Court allowed Hobby Lobby to refuse comprehensive birth control coverage. Peek into corporate boardrooms and notice the dearth of female CEOs.

Pay and other inequities hurt women -- and, by extension, families and communities (including men). Victims of domestic violence are less likely to leave if they can't stand on their own feet financially. And a lifetime of wage discrimination means women and their families also pay a price later when it comes to Social Security benefits.

They marvel about those who fought before them, like the suffragists who endured beatings, arrests and hunger strikes so women could earn the right to vote.

"Alice Paul showed up and said, 'I'm going to march on Pennsylvania Avenue," says Panjabi. "That's badass."

They can't fathom why anyone elected to serve in Congress would oppose the ERA.

"It's hard to vote against equal rights for women and then expect women to vote for you," says Gaylynn Burroughs, 36, director of policy and research at the Feminist Majority Foundation.

They feel strange sitting here, speaking on behalf of this fight. It's as if they're instinctively waiting for their mentors to do the talking -- women like Burroughs' boss, Eleanor "Ellie" Smeal, who has been waging battles for women's equality for more than 40 years.

Bolstering the bandwidth

The offices of Smeal's Feminist Majority Foundation in Arlington, Virginia, are abuzz with interns doing research, planning outreach, organizing reports. On the walls of one workroom are handwritten reminders of why they do what they do.

"I need feminism because ... People didn't believe I could be a cheerleader and valedictorian," reads one. "I need feminism because... It's 2014 and old white men are still trying to write laws that control my body," says another.

Smeal, 75, walks the hallways checking in with her young warriors, striding past a poster for the 2004 "March for Women's Lives." There's a framed Ms. Magazine cover -- Smeal is the publisher -- which reads "Wonder Woman for President." An image of Rosa Parks features her quote, "My sole concern was to get home after a hard day's work." A sketch of the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist is emblazoned with the words, "Gag me with a coat hanger."

In a conference room that doubles as a library for all-books-feminist-activist, the political analyst and strategist regales her protégé Burroughs -- joined today by Hager and other guests -- with war stories. She was president of NOW during the last big battle to ratify the ERA.

She took part in a silent vigil on the steps of the Capitol, while "little boys from the Boy Scouts yelled at us to get back in the kitchen," she says, laughing at the absurdity of it all. "These little twerps, and their parents wouldn't say anything. And there we were like schmucks not talking. It was awful!"

She details an Indiana march through a blizzard, the all-nighters in a Nevada library doing frenzied research, the ongoing struggle to find female lawyers to work with and a female CPA to do NOW's books. She cracks up recalling how befuddled she and her cohorts were by negative media coverage, until they remembered they were suing all three networks and many newspapers for discriminatory practices.

Smeal insists the real enemy was never Phyllis Schlafly; it was big business -- "We're the cheap labor pool" -- and insurance companies. Before the Affordable Care Act, women paid about $1 billion more than men each year in the individual health insurance market, according to the National Women's Law Center. And only 3% of the plans they had covered maternity services.

Reflecting on the last big ERA fight, Smeal says she and others in the core group knew their odds were bad. But they were building something bigger; it wasn't just one fight. They were an extension of a movement that began years before.

When she first met Alice Paul, it was in the wee hours of the night at the National Women's Party building. Smeal and others from the Pittsburgh NOW chapter woke up Paul, who came to the door in a nightgown. Smeal says she was mortified, especially after Paul ran to fetch a bell and started ringing it.

"If you'd waited 50 years for reinforcements, you'd be excited, too," she remembers a friend saying.

In the new reinforcements represented by Hager and Burroughs, Smeal sees all that is possible.

While she and her comrades once shut down Western Union when they sent 400,000 telegrams during a march on Washington, today's movement is bolstered by the bandwidth of the Internet and tools like Twitter.

Back in the day, it would take a week to move from a new idea to a mailing and require the help of children to stuff envelopes. These days, activists can blast out a fresh message to millions in minutes.

While only 12 women held seats in the U.S. Congress, now there are 104. Factor in women elected to offices across the country, Smeal says, "You couldn't get them all in one room."

Today, battles are being waged and won locally -- and don't require national mobilization. Oregon stands out as an example, having passed an Equal Rights Amendment to the state constitution in a landslide vote in November.

"The movement will grow. And the first good shot we get, you can bet we'll take it," Smeal says of the national ERA effort. "I see it as an intergenerational fight. I don't know if I'll be there. I don't know who will be there. But I know one thing: When we go over the top, we're going to need everybody."

Driving forward

Hager's sensible black pumps are killing her as she climbs into a cab after a long day on the Hill. She's greeted with a surprise that energizes her: At the wheel is only the third female taxi driver Hager has seen in her six years in Washington.

The cabbie, who's been at this job for 29 years, isn't fazed. If she had a penny for every passenger who has said they'd never had a female cab driver before, she says, "I'd be a rich somebody."

Instead, she gets fired up describing the men who've challenged her. Some say she's taken away their jobs. Others, when she was pregnant, accused her of not having a good husband because she works.

"I could go on and on and on," she says, asking that her name not be used. "I give them a piece of my mind, and that's why I don't have much of one anymore."

What got her on this roll is simple: Hager let her in on the not-so-secret fact that the ERA never passed.

"What are you saying?" the cabbie shrieks, her eyes wide. "I thought I was well educated. You're tripping me out! What do you mean I don't have equal rights?"

Now it's Hager's turn to be unfazed. She and her compatriots have seen this response so many times before. So she smiles, leans in from the back seat and begins to explain.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
the new women's movement: reviving the era fight - cnn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The new women's movement: Reviving the ERA fight - CNN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Though first introduced in 1923, the last time the country really paid attention to the ERA was in the 1970s and early '80s, before Hager was even born. That was when feminist activists brought the issue to a boil.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Let's be real: the last few weeks have been rough. I think everyone could use a nice, easy opinion that we can all agree on. Here's one: Beyoncé should have won the Grammy for album of the year.

I mean, come on. Do I even need to explain why? Anyone who listened to or watched Lemonade knows it was a pop culture phenomenon. Honestly, anyone who didn't still knows, thanks to news coverage analyzing the album and its accompanying video narrative for months after its release.

The album started a global discussion of race, feminism and womanism. The cohesiveness, the complexity and the symbolism in Lemonade's combination of music, poetry, imagery and documentary was literally breathtaking. The whole country felt it.

Adele's 25, which one this year's album of the year, was very nice. It was a good album, but it lacked the sweeping cultural impact of Lemonade. It was simply a nice, top-selling adult contemporary album from a very talented artist who has always been a favorite at the Grammy Awards.

The judges acted predictably when they chose a safe, white album of the year instead of one widely considered iconic for its celebration of black womanhood. After all, the Grammys has long faced criticism for under-representing black artists. The last black woman to win album of the year was Lauryn Hill almost 30 years ago.

Adele, however, showed every white woman in the audience what intersectional feminism looks like, in a move that made her, Beyoncé and every single person watching at home tear up a little (just admit it).
Adele's '25' belts predictable, but satisfying 'hello' to faithful fans English songstress and post-breakup therapist Adele is back with this year's undoubtedly most-anticipated release, her third album 25. Her previous Read...
"I can't possibly accept this award, and I'm very humbled and I'm very grateful and gracious, but my artist of my life is Beyoncé and this album, to me, the Lemonade album, was so monumental. Beyoncé, you are our light," Adele said during her acceptance speech. "And the way that you make me and my friends feel, the way you make my black friends feel, is empowering. You make them stand up for themselves and I love you. I always have and I always will."

Adele continued to lift up Beyonce's work during her time with the press backstage. " Album of the Year is My Lemonade," she reportedly said. "For her to make such relevant music for that long of a period ... What the fuck does she have to do to win album of the year? It was another side of her. Obviously, the visual is very new and the Grammys are very traditional, but this year I thought would be the year they go with the tide ."

The internet is joking about how Adele basically pulled a 2009 Kanye on herself, but what she did is very important. Of course, Lemonade will never have a chance to win a Grammy for album of the year again. But Adele's decision to publicly acknowledge her privilege, and how that privilege robbed her sister of a well-deserved honor, should serve as an example for those of us with various types of privilege to copy in our everyday lives.
The Badger Herald reacts to Beyoncé's 'Lemonade' Nothing gets a newsroom going quite like a new Beyoncé release. Here are our initial thoughts, musings, outbursts and epiphanies Read...
Adele's speech reminded us of the importance of calling out social injustices when we see them in action at home, work, school or online. Of course not every white person is personally responsible for racial bias in huge industries like music, but those industries won't be forced to improve until every person makes it clear that we care, that we see what's going on.

Adele can't help it if she won a Grammy thanks to a system that rewards art primarily for being white, comfortable and commercially successful. She worked hard on her album and it certainly deserves praise. But had Adele simply accepted the award, her silence would have implied a tacit agreement she deserved it over Beyoncé, that her win had nothing to do with the status quo, with the comfort of older, traditionalist white people. As she said herself, she was rooting for Beyoncé (and the black women her album represents), too.

By acknowledging how privilege and bias affect almost every aspect of everyday life, Adele started a national conversation about race, gender and recognition and inclusion in the "biggest night in music," one that may end up forcing the Grammys to finally "go with the tide," as she put it, or run the risk of drowning.

Julia O'Donnell ([email protected] ) is a senior majoring in journalism and strategic communication.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Adele's Grammy speech important to feminists worldwide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Let's be real: the last few weeks have been rough. I think everyone could use a nice, easy opinion that we can all agree on. Here's one: Beyoncé should have won the Grammy for album of the year. I mean, come on. Do I even need to explain why?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Under mounting pressure from a wide variety of demographics who feel underrepresented in film and television, the entertainment industry is finally beginning to show signs of diversity. It is important to recognize that this gradual movement toward a multicultural media is only the result of long and tiresome grassroots efforts. The fight for representation touches people from all cultural minority groups, and intersects in a powerful way. Here, we do not see change coming from the top down, but rather from the bottom up - we, the people, are dictating what the future of film and television will look like.

Considering National Association for the Deaf (NAD) is the oldest civil rights organization in the United States, it's easy to see that the American Deaf community has long been involved with the fight for social justice. In film and television, specifically, there have been a number of highly influential Deaf actors who have left lasting impacts on audiences of all ability. One of the most well-known examples is Linda Bove, who exposed many generations of children to deafness and ASL during her 30 year role as Linda the Librarian on public television's Sesame Street.

Over the past two years, the Deaf community has been actively pushing for greater cultural awareness through the #DeafTalent movement. #DeafTalent was started as a way for actors, performers, and directors who are deaf to push back against an industry that continuously hires hearing individuals when a deaf individual would be a much more appropriate choice. Why cast a hearing actor to play a deaf role? Why hire a hearing director to offer a deaf perspective? There are plenty of exceptionally talented deaf individuals seeking exactly this type of work, who would truly enrich any creative project.

The existence of #DeafTalent effectively removes any excuse people might have for culturally negligent hiring. Popularized by director Jules Dameron, the hashtag and social media presence has become one way to connect casting directors, investors, and so on with the deaf community. It shines a very clear spotlight on the problems in the industry and Dameron, herself, even offers up solutions on how to create true diversity in film and TV.

"Much of our inspiration today built on previous movements such as the historic 1988 Deaf President Now (DPN) movement at Gallaudet University which led to the passage of the ADA bill in 1990," Charmaine Hlibok, Director of Fundraising at Mark Seven Deaf Foundation explains. "DPN will celebrate its 30th anniversary next March, and today's deaf children have many more opportunities today than many of us had."

Without constant labor from advocacy groups, mainstream film and TV would probably never deviate from reinforcing the white, cisgendered, able-bodied, heterosexual male perspective as status quo. Like other minority groups, people who are d/Deaf/HoH couldn't just wait around expecting Hollywood to change. For generations, performers, writers, directors, and filmmakers have been creating their own inclusive artistic communities, laying the foundation for the success of the activist efforts of today.

Set to make a bicostal debut on Saturday, March 25 with premier events in both Los Angeles and New York City, The Strength Within You short film series is the first, and certainly not the last, of its kind. Inspired greatly by the #DeafTalent movement, The Strength Within You series features an exciting roster of Deaf talent in each of five films (both in front of and behind the camera). The film project was coordinated by filmmaker and producer Katia Belas as a way to explore various social issues and taboos- from domestic violence to LGBTQ rights- through a slightly different lens than audiences are used to seeing.

After being away from the film industry for 13 years, Belas, who is a Brazilian immigrant, found it impossible to make a career. "People looked down at me and would see only an old stupid, no-talent, no-vision, no-good-for-anything person." Belas found herself working internships so she could learn how to utilize the new methods of media distribution that had come about during her hiatus. Like so many others trying to break through in the film and TV industry, she quietly endured instances of discrimination while networking and developing her craft. Finally, one day, she saw a film that opened her eyes to an alternative. Instead of waiting for an opportunity to make an impact, she had to create that opportunity herself!

"It was a very short 1:54 minute silent film (almost a PSA) done by 2 amazing Deaf talents called ' CIG.' I saw it and thought: that is what I will do for me, and for people who, like me, are also seen as the 'stupid, no-talent, no-good for anything' in this world," Belas explains. "Being involved with Deaf people for 3 years, I had already decided that my main goal when working in the industry was to work with Deaf Talents. So I just put 2 and 2 together, and came up with the idea to make this series."

"It is a series of empowering, uplifting, humanity messages created by a team of Deaf and hearing filmmakers," continues Belas. "Short films done with Deaf talents, proving to the world that we (Deaf, immigrants, older people) have talents, we are not stupid, and we can do anything regardless of anything, age, disability, language."

Filmmaker Jade Bryan has been working for more than a decade to, as she explains it, "increase positive representation of Deaf People of Color in television and film." Bryan's more recent projects, If You Could Hear My Own Tune and The Shattered Mind have made extensive rounds on the festival circuits, winning numerous awards. She is currently working on an exciting new documentary series, alongside deaf actress and producer Maleni Chaitoo, titled #RESIST Through Our Eyes.

According to the project's active Fundraising Page #RESIST Through Our Eye s will be an 8-part documentary series "which will follow and document Deaf and Hard of Hearing people's personal experiences and concerns when their human and civil rights are violated, challenged and threatened in the current political climate of chaos, toxicity, propaganda, "alternative facts" and uncertainty that exist under a regime Administration. We will meet and interview Deaf and Hard of Hearing individuals whose Constitutional Rights have being threatened or violated... this includes activists, advocators, educators, lawyers, interpreters, Human and Civil Rights agencies and organizations, and their allies."

Bryan sees intersectionality as the future of media. "Diversity does not necessarily means inclusive because they do not always include 'the others.' What do I mean by other? Deaf talents of color, people with other disabilities," she explains. "As of today, 2017, the entertainment and television industry do not see us as an equal part of society. We're always kept on sidelines or ignored... We have so much story to tell. Why are we as intersectional, the disabled and black deaf talents, being overlooked? Although I promote inclusion and deaf talents of color, we must be careful of erasing anyone. There are so many of us who are ready to tell our stories."

With the rise of the internet, which offers opportunity for visibility and a public platform, people who are d/Deaf/HoH have been actively correcting wrong assumptions, smashing stereotypes, and working to dismantle the structural barriers that oppress entire groups of people due to the way they are born and/or they way they choose to communicate. Members of the majority culture are now getting exposed to all different aspects of deafness and Deaf culture through intersectional social justice dialogues and deaf-created content. People are seeing, perhaps for the first time, that people who are deaf are mostly just regular everyday human beings who want the same kind of happiness and success as everyone else, and that they can do pretty much all the same things hearing people can do- except for hear.

At the very roots of all grassroots movements are the younger generations. Working to ensure a future where d/Deaf/HoH children grow up confident in their ability to pursue their creative dreams without limitations, CampMark7 Deaf Film Camp is now in its fifth year of working with aspiring filmmakers ages 13-16 in Old Forge, NY to learn the ins and outs of the process- from script writing to screening. Campers are given the equipment, software, and guidance they need to turn their ideas into reality in a fast-paced, yet supportive hands-on filmmaking program. Several of the deaf campers' final films have even gone viral- the ASL music video they made for Pharrell's "Happy" has more than 1.7 million views on YouTube at this time!

"The Deaf Film Camp is a huge success because they work directly with skilled deaf role models and campers have direct communication access to their teachers," Hlibok explains of CampMark7. "The Lights Camera Access! 2.0, the National Disability Mentorship Coalition, PolicyWorks, and many others support our mission and collaborate with us on various outreach projects. We host summits in NYC, DC and Los Angeles during the year for students who wish to meet mentors and meet with role models in the media industry who can provide opportunities to find internships or careers in their respective fields."

As an accessible, inclusive, and immersive program, CampMark7 fosters the innate potentials of young people who might otherwise encounter discouraging limitations. Deaf/HoH youth deserve more music and arts programs that enrich their lives and facilitate a deeper, reciprocal connection to the cultural arts. Supporting organizations that work with young people is easy, for example the Deaf Film Camp Showcase Event on March 25 at Lexington School for the Deaf in Queens, NY will help raise funds for 2017 camper tuitions. For those who struggle with communication on a regular basis, creative outlets such as film, writing, art, or music, can provide a much needed avenue for healthy self-expression and building self-confidence.

"Human difference is a strength for all of us when we can teach and learn together," Hlibok continues. "America has struggled with this in the past, and we are making progress towards correcting injustices every day. This is among the reasons why diversity is so important in film & TV."

As the DeafTalent movement continues to spread, influencing the very fabric of American pop culture, creative people who are deaf will build further upon these grassroots efforts. The larger intersectional discourse with regards to how the media portrays people from minority communities is bringing many advocacy groups together, thus raising the visibility of marginalized people seeking work in the industry. Awareness about the importance and availability of deaf perspectives only increases as skilled actors, writers, directors, camera people, and consultants are gradually making their way onto major production teams and on-screen roles.

This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Under mounting pressure from a wide variety of demographics who feel underrepresented in film and television, the entertainment industry is finally beginning to show signs of diversity. It is important to recognize that this gradual movement toward a multicultural media is only the result of long and tiresome grassroots efforts.

# data[].attributes.body
5-reasons-intersectionality-matters-because-feminism-cannot-be-inclusive-without-it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It seems like a given that feminism should try to help all women, especially those who are most disadvantaged. But privileged women don't always realize when they're excluding less privileged groups or how this exclusion harms them - which is why intersectionality is so important. Feminism cannot achieve its goals without intersectionality, and these five facts drive that point home.

The phenomenon of "white feminism" - advocacy for gender equality that ignores the unique experiences of women of color - has brought intersectionality to the forefront of discussions about feminism. For example, after Nicki Minaj called out the exclusion of black women in the entertainment industry on Twitter during this year's VMAs, Miley Cyrus called her "not very polite" - a response that both tone-polices black women and refuses to address racism. This brand of feminism is dangerously common among white women who haven't ever had to think about the experiences of women of color.

By excluding women of color and other marginalized groups, we make feminism a movement that privileges certain perspectives over others - exactly what feminism is trying to combat. In case you need convincing, here are a few facts that prove feminists need to think about more than gender for their feminism to include everyone. This list is by no means exhaustive, but it offers several examples of how, for many groups of people, feminism is not about gender alone.

Let's say a white, non-Hispanic man and a Latina woman both started a new job on Jan. 1, 2014. In order to make as much as he made by Dec. 31, 2014, she would have had to work until last Thursday, October 15, 2015. That's the Latina gender pay gap in action - the fact that Latina women make 54 percent of what white men make for working full-time.

A common argument about the wage gap is that it simply reflects women performing different jobs, but research shows that this doesn't tell the whole story: Renee Davidson points out at Ms. that women are paid less than men for the same jobs within the food service industry, one that contains a disproportionate number of Hispanic people. In addition, the fact that Hispanic women hold different jobs from white men doesn't take away from the problem of unfair payment but rather is a problem in of itself. Hispanic people are less likely to hold college degrees, and only one percent of the computing and engineering workforce consists of Hispanic women.

Black women also face a higher wage gap than white women, making 64 percent of what white men make, and for Native American women, that figure is 65 percent. If we only look at the numbers by gender, we miss how race figures into the problem as well.

This is over twice the unemployment rate of the able-bodied, which was 5.9 percent. And the same prejudice and lack of accommodations that have excluded disabled people from the workforce have also excluded them from feminism. Feminist conferences are often inaccessible, readings are often not available in braille, and videos often don't contain transcripts. In addition, feminism has a history of using ableist words like "crippled" and "handicapped" to describe women's disadvantages.

This is compared to 33 percent of woman overall. Perpetrators of sexual assault often view women with disabilities as easy targets, and victims only report three percent of assaults, often because services like ASL interpreters aren't available to them. The campus sexual assault epidemic feminists are seeking to combat is even worse for students with disabilities: 48 percent of deaf and hard-of-hearing students at one school reported unwanted sexual contact during college.

4. Black Women Are Three To Four Times More Likely To Die During Childbirth In The United States Than White Women

Women of color face a number of other race-based reproductive health disparities, including higher rates of STIs. Black women are also three times as likely as white women to experience an unintended pregnancy. In addition, immigrants are three times as likely as U.S.-born citizens to lack healthcare coverage.

Testing sites in California report a 29 percent HIV diagnosis rate for black transgender women, compared to just four percent for men who have sex with men and six percent for transgender women overall. This is likely because trans people and African Americans have less access to healthcare (largely because they are more often unemployed) and healthcare professionals often don't know how to treat them. Healthcare and other systems aren't geared toward people who subvert the gender binary, and that's a feminist issue.

Images: Jonathan McIntosh, Elias Gayles, Elliott Brown/Flickr

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Reasons Intersectionality Matters, Because Feminism Cannot Be Inclusive Without It

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It seems like a given that feminism should try to help all women, especially those who are most disadvantaged. But privileged women don't always realize when they're excluding less privileged groups or how this exclusion harms them - which is why...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"If you have come to help me, you are wasting your time. If you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together." -Lilla Watson, Australian Aboriginal activist

A few years ago, I attended a workshop facilitated by Peggy McIntosh at the annual White Privilege Conference . In the workshop, McIntosh explained that she wished she could go back and rewrite the introduction of " Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack ," her seminal piece on White privilege.

The problem, she explained, is that people tend to treat her piece as a checklist of privileges that every White person experiences - but it's not. The piece describes the context of her White privilege as a White woman with wealth privilege in an institution of higher education.

But privilege doesn't function as a monolith; White privilege isn't the same for every White individual and doesn't function in the same way, to the same degree, for all White people.

However, all White people experience racial privilege. Full stop.

Our privileges, though, are complicated by other aspects of our identity that intersect with our Whiteness.

is a complex idea, but part of it means that when we are discussing someone's class or ableist oppression, we must consider those things in the context of other areas where they might be marginalized Intersectionality as well as where they might be privileged.

When those movements are intersectional, then working in concert with others means that we are also working for our own liberation.

So toward that end, I want to complicate some of the items from McIntosh's list, highlighting how those items exist at intersections of identity that mean different things to different White people.

Hopefully this can help us break through some of the defensiveness that comes up in conversations about privilege. Namely, when White folks deflect to aspects of our identity that are marginalized rather than being accountable to our privilege.

Before proceeding, though, I want to briefly note the irony of White people (myself and McIntosh) being centered in conversations about the privileges that are the result of oppression.

If we as White people listened to people of Color, articles like this one simply wouldn't be necessary. Unfortunately, though, often we as White folks aren't the best at listening to people of Color, but maybe we will hear things differently from a fellow White person.

Thus, if you're White, I can't stress enough how important it is for us to diversify our media consumption to learn from people of Color. But if it helps you to hear me complicate our conversation about privilege, then I hope it inspires you to continue along the path toward more anti-racist ways of being.

1. 'If I Move, I Can Find Housing in an Area I Can Afford and Want to Live In'

For most White people, this is likely true. After all, Whiteness as a system has long ensured White people had greater access to wealth and rarely faced or other forms of racist housing discrimination.

But the ability to rent or purchase housing one can afford where one wants to live is most definitely a marker not just of race, but of class - and not all White people have the same access to capital.

Unfortunately, what this often means is that low-wealth White people use their class struggles to avoid acknowledging racial privilege.

For many White people, we may be able to buy or rent in areas where we feel centered and where White wealth is accumulated. However, to speak about wealth as a White monolith doesn't actually serve us in engaging White people in working for racial justice; some White folks frankly don't feel very privileged as a result of their economic struggles.

Because to be White and wealthy in the US is simply not the same thing as to be White and poor.

As a result, we have a responsibility to talk about the access to wealth that we are afforded and that people of Color simply are not, but we need to do so in a way that describes the complexity of that wealth.

We can't compare the ways that Whiteness operates for wealthy White folks to low-wealth White people, but we ought to still recognize how White privilege is at play.

After all, when poor White people commit crimes, they definitely may be locked up, but they also are likely to get better treatment by police and the courts than people of Color.

I mean, when two low-wealth moms (one White and one Black) broke the law for the sake of their children, the White woman was showered with Christmas gifts by police while the Black woman received jail time, community service, and a $30,000 fine .

2. 'My Children Will Be Given Curricular Materials That Testify the Existence of Their Race'

Let's be honest: Standard curriculum is essentially "Whiteness Studies." White people are most definitely going to see themselves and their identity positively represented in their curriculum along lines of race.

But for some White students, they're not able to recognize how their racial identity is centered when other aspects of their identity are attacked and erased.

When our curricula don't show complex portraits of gender, sexual identity, and class, it hurts students - not just White kids.

Just last year, I spoke at a high school, and in my talk, I mentioned the violence that Trans and Gender Non-Conforming people face in the United States face, noting in my comments that Trans women of Color are more likely to experience violence than any other segment of our population.

After the talk, a young person who I read as White came up to thank me, identifying themselves as Trans, telling me that this was the very first time in their entire education that anyone in school acknowledged the existence of their identity.

Frankly, this statement broke my heart. That this young person could go through sixteen or seventeen years of schooling and never see a vital aspect of their identity mentioned would likely make it pretty difficult to focus on the real and important ways that their racial identity is centered in their education.

To a White Transgender student, the fact that their Whiteness is privileged may very well be real but it might not feel so important when they face real and rhetorical violence in school every day.

Thus, to engage that White student in working against oppression means complicating our narratives about Whiteness and education to speak to .

It's not likely to resonate with a Gay or Trans White 14-year-old to explain how they are centered in their curriculum if we are not also able to address how they do face so much daily verbal and physical assault for being who they are, including from teachers, while also discussing how Queer people of Color face higher rates of violence and harassment.

To be White and Gay or Trans is to have a different relationship to Whiteness than to be Straight and Cis and White, and we have to address Whiteness as complicated by our identities.

So to engage race in education, we must also address all of the other forms of marginalization and oppression that students face, particularly in a society where those most at risk for violence are those living at the intersections of multiple erasures: Queer and Trans people of Color .

3. 'I Can Often Arrange to Protect My Children from People Who Might Not Like Them'

When I reread this particular item from McIntosh's list, I can't help but think that this is a privilege for very few people.

Parents of children surely can't assure that their children are protected from hostile teachers , , or community members .

And again, LGBTQAI+ youth of Color don't have the same levels of protections that many White students have, but to pretend that White students who exist at the marginalized intersections of gender and sexual identity can rely solely on Whiteness to protect them from harm does nothing to actually understand or address White privilege or oppression.

The same can be said of children with disabilities , as regardless of a child's racial identity, they face violence from and other . Children with disabilities are universally more likely to be sexually assaulted and abused than students without disabilities. To be clear, students of Color with disabilities face increased levels of incarceration and harsh discipline that White students do not face.

The point, though, is that Whiteness cannot universally protect students from those who wish to do them harm.

And this is to say nothing of the more systemic forms of oppression that Queer people and people with Disabilities experience across racial identities.

Aside from analysis of Whiteness, what of children without citizenship documentation ? Of or or children of any racial identity?

Absolutely, Whiteness and its connections to wealth buys protection from harm in ways that are simply not afforded to any people of Color, but honestly, this seems like a privilege that just isn't afforded to very many people.

And to talk about Whiteness in monoliths doesn't actually help us address the ways that race intersects with marginalized aspects of people's identities.

Tunnel Vision Is Not a Privilege

I could likely do this with every one of the items in McIntosh's list, but you get the point. McIntosh's work is important, as it has helped countless White people, including myself, to think more critically about the benefits afforded to us because of our skin color's place in a system of oppression.

And in all of the above instances, White people surely can and do experience very real and powerful racial privileges, but if we aren't willing to talk about those privileges at the intersections, then I fear we do little to actually engage every possible White person in working for racial justice.

No, we shouldn't need to contextualize our privilege every time we are forced to confront it - to do so can be a way of avoiding accountability.

But as White folks working to engage other White people, contextualizing privilege can go a long way toward realizing true accountability, where we are not simply engaging out of paternalism but out of our own need for intersectional liberation .

So to close, I want to highlight just one more of the items from McIntosh's list, one that definitely is a privilege in one way of thinking, but more broadly, it is not a privilege:

"My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people of other races."

This is absolutely true; as a White person I can never consider the lived reality of anyone who isn't White, and this ignorance can be seen as a privilege.

But is it one? Because frankly that "privilege" sure does feel like a terrible detriment.

When I live in the tunnel vision that Whiteness affords me, I don't live an engaged life, one that is enriched by the hard work of building relationships across difference and the challenges and triumphs that come with working in coalition to realize justice.

And in thinking about the terrible way to live that's reflected in this statement, I can't help but think the isolation inherent in Whiteness is a part of every single privilege we reap by investing in that system.

And this is why we must complicate how we as White people talk to other White people about privilege: Doing so opens the door to new ways of thinking about why we must end our addiction to the privileges Whiteness affords.

Rather than simply working from paternalism, we can understand how our liberation is "bound up with" the liberation of people of Color.

And that's the genesis of true solidarity.
Jamie Utt is the Founder and Director of Education at CivilSchools, a comprehensive bullying prevention program, a diversity and inclusion consultant, and sexual violence prevention educator based in Tucson, AZ. He is currently working toward his PhD in Teaching, Learning, and Sociocultural Studies at the University of Arizona with research interests in the role that White teacher's racial identity plays in their teaching practice. Learn more about his work at hiswebsite here and follow him on Twitter @utt_jamie. Read his articles here and book him for speaking engagements.

Filed Under: Tagged With: Articles, Race & Ethnicity Posts

Everyday Feminism Contributing Writer, speaker, activist, consultant, gallivanter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
3 Examples That Show Even White Privilege Needs to be Viewed Intersectionally - Everyday Feminism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
White privilege doesn't show up the same way for everyone - so you may balk at the idea that all white people have privilege. By complicating three common examples, this author helps you understand how privilege and marginalization can intersect.

# data[].attributes.body
If I were a boy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article was posted in Gender

Posted by Mey on

The clear breakout star of Netflix's new series Orange is the New Black is actress Laverne Cox who plays Sophia Burset, a transgender woman serving time along with all the other prisoners in the fictional Litchfield Correctional Facility in New York. At one point, Sophia is denied her hormone therapy, highlighting the problem that trans* women in general, and especially in prison, of have in getting proper medical care. Sophia is the rare example of a trans woman in prison who actually gets to be incarcerated with other women. The horrifying reality of the situation is that trans* people are almost always put in prison with inmates that match their gender assigned at birth. This not only leads to lack of proper medical care, but also mental anguish, increased rates of harassment and violence and shockingly high rates of sexual abuse. For trans* women who are locked up, getting access to medical care and safety from the guards and inmates is a serious problem. But the problem starts when they are put in prisons designed for men.

Perhaps the most high profile recent case of a trans* woman being sent to prison is CeCe McDonald. In June of 2011, McDonald, an African American woman, and a group of friends were walking past a bar when a group of white men started hurling racist, homophobic and transphobic insults at them. A fight broke out and McDonald had a glass broken in her face and needed 11 stitches. She and her friends tried to get away, but were followed and the main attacker, Dean Schmitz, was fatally stabbed with a pair of scissors. Despite Schmitz' history of violent crime and affiliation with white supremacist groups, McDonald was charged with second-degree murder but pleaded down to manslaughter. She was sentenced to 41 months in the men's prison in St. Cloud, Minnesota. As soon as she was arrested, McDonald had little hope of being placed in the correct prison. According to Katie Burgess, the executive director of the Trans Youth Support Network, "there's really no history of transgender people being placed according to their gender identity."

The National Center for Lesbian Rights says that transgender prisoners who have not undergone gender confirmation surgery are placed according to their assigned gender at birth. This means that all trans* women who do not want bottom surgery or are unable to obtain it are forced to live in men's prisons. Given the fact that it is extremely difficult for many transgender people, and especially transgender women of color, to get steady jobs and housing, getting gender confirmation surgery is something that often remains out of reach. And it is trans* women of color who are most often targeted by police. The National Center for Transgender Equality shows that 21% of transgender women and nearly half of all black trans* have been incarcerated at least once in their lives. This is compared to 2.7% of the overall population. The surgery requirement leaves trans* prisoners, and especially trans* women, incredibly vulnerable to sexual harassment and assault.

A men's prison is a dangerous place for a woman. According to a Department of Justice study, more than 1/3 of transgender inmates was sexually abused and that trans* women are more than 13 times more likely to be sexually assaulted while in prison than cis women. The frightening reality is that when trans* women are arrested, they go from a world where they are already disproportionately the victims of violent crimes to a world that is perhaps even more dangerous. This is a bleak picture, and one that could very likely be improved at least somewhat if trans* women were simply allowed to live in the proper prisons.

Trans* women who are forced to live in men's prisons also have to face the humiliation of having to pretend to be the wrong gender. In many prisons, trans* women are forced to cut their hair and are not allowed any gender appropriate clothes. For many trans* women who already might suffer from depression and/or dysphoria, this is another burden they are forced to bear. Report after report has found that trans* people suffer higher rates of harassment, bullying and assault than other inmates, and this especially true of trans* women that are forced to live in men's prisons. For many trans* inmates, their greatest hope lies in being placed in Protective Custody, which often only happens after they have been sexually assaulted. Here they are kept away from the rest of the prison population and are usually safe from harm that would come from other inmates. However, they are more vulnerable to assault from guards and prison workers and face social isolation and a lack of activities and educational and vocational training.

For many trans* women currently incarcerated in men's prisons, sexual assault is only one of many problems they have to deal with. Many don't even have access to the hormones they need to keep their bodies and minds healthy. This is the case with Ophelia De'lonta, a trans* woman of color in a Virginia men's prison. The Virginia Department of Corrections recently ruled that her hormone therapy wasn't medically necessary and therefore they won't pay for it anymore. Courts have ruled that prisons must do what they can to keep all prisoners safe and healthy, but trans* prisoners have had the burden of proving they are unsafe or have an extreme medical need for hormone therapy placed squarely on their shoulders.
Are you following us on Facebook?
It seems like there are no set rules or guidelines for why trans* women who haven't had bottom surgery are placed in men's prisons. Prisoners have said that in most cases officers examined their genitals when they were arrested and made the decision based off of that, regardless of their gender identity, other steps they've taken in their transition or which prison they would most safe in. Several trans* women have tried taking their cases to the courts, hoping that they would be placed in women's prisons, but they are almost always unsuccessful, due in part to a ruling that says inmates don't have the right to be placed in any particular prison. Overall, it seems that the Criminal Justice System doesn't consider trans* women who haven't had bottom surgery to be true women. This creates a nightmare situation where trans* women are consistently placed in prisons that are entirely unsafe for them and ill equipped to properly care for them. Until all trans* women are seen as the women that they are and their medical needs and safety are considered to be priorities, prison life will continue to be a violent and terrifying experience for far too many trans* women.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Real-Life Sophia Bursets: Transgender Women Face a Nightmare in Men's Prisons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article was posted in Gender Posted by Mey on The clear breakout star of Netflix's new series Orange is the New Black is actress Laverne Cox who plays Sophia Burset, a transgender woman serving time along with all the other prisoners in the fictional Litchfield Correctional Facility in New York.

# data[].attributes.body
caitlyn-jenners-social-construction-of-gender

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In April 2015, Olympic athlete and reality television star Bruce Jenner sat down with ABC's Diane Sawyer to reveal his gender identity. Born male, Bruce declared that he always felt female and was going through the process of becoming a woman. In June, an image of Jenner dressed in a cream-colored bustier was the cover of Vanity Fair magazine, captioned by the pronouncement, "Call me Caitlyn."

Those of us born in the last forty years have had little choice but to be affected by waves of cultural change. Every generation has this, of course, but generations who have been branded like cattle with the letters "x" and "y" have been placed in the unique position of both benefiting from the feminist and queer activism of those who came before us while also participating in a massive technological, Internet-based, and over-exposed celebrity culture which saturates our socialization. For feminist pop culture scholars like myself this is thrilling, especially considering the impact pop culture can have on society.

My generation was pushed into the "We are the World" phenomenon, the 1985 song whose proceeds benefited USA for Africa. We saw Magic Johnson announce his HIV status, forever cementing a childhood hero's vulnerability and shattering ideas about 'who gets AIDS.' We were young and impressionable when Madonna came on the scene, her music and images pushing against gender roles.

In the decades that followed, we have witnessed our country's shift in gay and lesbian rights, through comediennes like Ellen DeGeneres, pop stars and actors such as Lance Bass and Neil Patrick Harris as well as countless others who came out and then continued to have thriving careers.

My generation has watched as pop culture shined a light on issues such as violence against women, in part, because of the work of people like musician Tori Amos who co-founded RAINN, Angelina Jolie's status as a U.N. goodwill ambassador and even men like WWE legend Mick Foley who regularly raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to support the work of RAINN and volunteer for the hotline.

Yet, these examples are of people acting intentionally and using their time and talent to better the world. Which is why it is surprising that a reality show, whose premise is to follow a wealthy family's quest for stardom, is becoming part of social change.

Like most people, I know that beings called Kardashians and Jenners exist. The reality television show Keeping Up with the Kardashian's has run regularly since 2008, featuring the blended family of Kris Kardashian and Bruce Jenner. The family's popularity has had huge monetary gains and spurred a list of products too long to mention ( here is a link to most of them), while simultaneously being critiqued for the "reality" created by the show's producers.

It is because of the widespread impact of the show that leads me to think that the transition of Bruce Jenner to Caitlyn Jenner may be one of the single most important moments in pop culture for multiple generations. Whether we think of Caitlyn as an Olympic athlete, father or reality TV star, her transition from man to woman in such a public and well-orchestrated way is inescapable. Very few Americans can now say they do not know of someone who is transgender.

Caitlyn's public revelation will undoubtedly help people who are struggling with transgender issues, being able to see ourselves and identify with another person is part of social development. It will also feed the masses of skeptical or cynical people who reject the power of celebrity. This is the beauty and brutality of popular culture.

Incredibly, watching the way Jenner has chronicled her life-long struggle with gender has placed terms like "gender identity" and "sex vs. gender" into media culture. The social construction of gender is becoming part of a national conversation, and gender studies scholarship is leaping into daily coverage of Jenner's transition. Terms like 'intersectionality' are entering discussions about age (Jenner is 65), social class (she can afford the best surgical procedures) and privilege (unlimited resources aid her ability to transition and pass as a woman). Currently, gender studies is a focus of national media, something that was evident in the Keeping Up with the Kardashian's special, "About Bruce" when Kim bluntly asked her step-father, "So if you're a 'woman' and you used to have sex with my mom, does that mean you're a lesbian?" In that moment, queer theory entered the Kardashian household. Millions of people were challenged to think about the spectrum of sexuality. Now, frank conversations about gender roles are popping up at dinner tables and coffee shops around the country.

Of course, Jenner's experience does not speak for all transgender people. (How could it?)

As coverage of the Vanity Fair cover unfolded, comments about Caitlyn's appearance were abundant. Being able to "pass" as male/female allows a certain amount of privilege for transgender people, their image conforms to set gender norms. There is comfort in men and women resembling our socially constructed ideas of male/female. Additionally, transitioning the way Caitlyn did was costly, the multiple surgeries and cosmetic procedures are not available for all. Further, as Jon Stewart noted, the media's appetite for breaking down women's looks is insatiable, as they did when the Vanity Fair image was released.

For transgender people there is already a high level of scrutiny about their bodies and, for transgender women, her cultural capital is based on her beauty. Jenner is lucky, she met these social expectations, CNN even declared her to be "stunning. " Passing is not as easy for many transgender people. There are limited resources for most to have a perfect coming out.

Regardless, the spotlight Caitlyn has elected to shine on herself is going to change lives. Gender, in all its inceptions, needs to be a part of the national conversation and Caitlyn Jenner is doing just that. I can't wait to see what happens next.
________________

Adrienne Trier-Bieniek PhD is a gender and pop culture sociologist. She is the author of Sing Us a Song, Piano Woman: Female Fans and the Music of Tori Amos (Scarecrow Press, 2013) and co-editor of Gender and Pop Culture: A Text-Reader (Sense, 2014). Her writing has appeared in various academic journals as well as xoJane, The Mary Sue, Gender & Society Blog, Feministing, and Girl w/Pen, and she runs the Facebook page Pop Culture Feminism. Adrienne Trier-Bieniek is a professor of sociology at Valencia College in Orlando, Florida.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Caitlyn Jenner's Social Construction of Gender - Feminist Reflections

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In April 2015, Olympic athlete and reality television star Bruce Jenner sat down with ABC's Diane Sawyer to reveal his gender identity. Born male, Bruce declared that he always felt female and was going through the process of becoming a woman.

# data[].attributes.body
Gender discrimination

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gender discrimination in organizations is still a real issue in 2016

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Last month, San Diego-based tech company Qualcomm agreed to pay a total of $19 million to settle a federal class action lawsuit in a gender discrimination settlement. In May, KPMG’s Gender Di…

# data[].attributes.headline
Sexual discrimination by sterling jewelers 

# data[].attributes.subject
Sexual discrimination by sterling jewelers 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sandra Sargent had finally had enough when a guard at Jared the Galleria of Jewelry in Crestview Hills, Ky., waved his security scanning wand over her buttocks one day in 2007. Several weeks earlier, she said, he had used the same device to brush across her chest. So she called an anonymous company hotline and reported his behavior.

It was an inauspicious career decision by Ms. Sargent, a manager at the store. The complaint made its way to a district manager who later told her that she should "grow some thick skin" and that the guard had been having "harmless fun," according to a sworn written statement from Ms. Sargent. Soon after, she was fired.

Ms. Sargent is among the hundreds of former employees of Sterling Jewelers, the parent of Kay Jewelers, Jared and other jewelry retailers, whose statements about their experiences at the company were released on Feb. 26. The statements, most of them from women, are part of a class-action case that includes 69,000 current or former employees and accuses Sterling of pay discrimination against women.

The company has denied any wrongdoing. On the matter of pay and promotion discrimination, the accusations are "not substantiated by the facts," Signet Jewelers Limited, the parent of Sterling, said in a statement. In addition, Sterling said it found the claims of sexual misconduct to be without merit.

But lawyers and academics who specialize in gender discrimination say the documents - more than 1,300 pages in total - provide a rare insight into how a company's policies work in real life. Whether it is a not-so-confidential tip line or an in-house court, they say, some widely used corporate procedures can mask problems that women often face in the workplace. Here is a look at what the documents revealed.

Hotlines for Employees

Sterling's hotline was a particular problem in the view of many of the women who made statements, with some expressing fear of retaliation should they use it. Employees who called the hotline, known as the TIPS line, were supposed to be able to report problems anonymously.

Many companies have hotlines that are effective and guarantee anonymity, and they can be "a sound H.R. tool" enabling complaints to circumvent the normal chain of command, said Joseph Sellers, one of the lawyers representing the Sterling women. "The question is, 'What's done with the information once it's provided to the people inside?'" he said.

Nancy Erika Smith, the lawyer who represented Gretchen Carlson, a television anchor, in her sexual harassment lawsuit against Roger Ailes, the Fox News founder, said making use of the hotline also introduces the risk that an employer can gather valuable information before an employee is represented by a lawyer.

"I have no recollection of any client having a good outcome from a hotline," she said.

Jeanette Digennaro, who worked in several Sterling chains, said in the testimony that after she called the TIPS line to report sexually harassing comments, a human resources associate followed up to chastise her for making the call.

"I felt like a defendant in a crime being interrogated by H.R.," Ms. Digennaro said. She was fired several weeks later.

David Bouffard, a spokesman for Signet, declined to respond to detailed questions about the company's policies and the recently released statements.

Mandatory Arbitration

Since 1998, all employees at Sterling have had to agree that they will never sue the company. Instead, Sterling has a three-step internal dispute system known as "Resolve" that can escalate to an arbitration hearing. The class-action case against the company is now in that arbitration process.

Outside of the securities industry, Sterling was early to adopt a no-suing policy. Today, lured by the twin benefits of avoiding large jury awards and keeping ugly stories under wraps, companies are increasingly requiring arbitration. Alexander Colvin, a professor at Cornell's School of Industrial and Labor Relations, estimates that a quarter of employees in nonunion workplaces are subject to mandatory arbitration.

The upside to internal dispute systems is that "a lot of problems get solved," said Lauren B. Edelman, a sociologist and the author of "Working Law: Courts, Corporations, and Symbolic Civil Rights."

But employees should exercise caution, Ms. Edelman said. If the disputes become legal claims, she said, the employee who used the in-house program can be at a disadvantage. "It's often these offices that end up providing the defense for the organization," she said.

Donald Davison, a former manager at Osterman Jewelers in Mentor, Ohio, said his daughter's boss at a Kay store said to her, "If you don't put out, you'll be out," according to his statement. Mr. Davison complained, and his daughter was fired a week later, according to the documents. She filed a complaint with Resolve "which failed to remedy" her firing and harassment, he said.

Sterling has fought hard when employees have tried to bypass the Resolve rules and file claims in court. In 2004, a female employee said in a claim that she had witnessed the rape of her roommate by a Sterling manager at an annual resort outing sponsored by Sterling in 2003. Sterling fired the man, who ultimately pleaded no contest to sexual battery.

But the female employee, who went by Jane Doe in court papers, said the company "set out to investigate, intimidate and discredit" her and the assault victim after the company got notice that the victim might sue the firm. Sterling fired her in 2004, saying she had withheld information in its investigation of the rape case. She sued Sterling, accusing the company of wrongful termination, retaliation and invasion of privacy, in a suit that was separate from the class-action case.

In response, Sterling said in court papers that it had been reported to the company that the plaintiff had "engaged in lewd and lascivious behavior" at the outing, which itself was infamous for its debauchery.

Sterling persuaded a judge in Ohio that the case should be compelled to arbitration. It settled for undisclosed terms, according to the plaintiff's lawyer.

'Tap on the Shoulder'

In their affidavits, Sterling's women described instances where people got promotions because they were friends with the boss, or even were sleeping with the boss, but never because they had seen a job posting they had decided to pursue. The lack of promotions, they argue, helped contribute to lower wages for women.

Sterling managed its promotions by a so-called tap on the shoulder policy in which managers picked the people they liked instead of publicly posting job openings.

Joan Williams, the founding director at the Center for WorkLife Law in San Francisco, said shoulder tapping had lost much of its popularity in corporate America because it is widely recognized as a recipe for a lack of diversity.

In 2007, Sterling introduced a program known as the Career Advancement Register, or C.A.R., that allowed employees to register interest in jobs they might want. In a memo seeking legal certification for its class-action case, though, the women said C.A.R. wound up being a paperwork formality that did not change anything.

"I was unaware of anyone who was promoted after registering into C.A.R.," Ms. Digennaro said in her sworn declaration.

In its statement, Sterling said that more than 68 percent of its store management staff members were female.

According to an expert report by the plaintiffs, though, from 2004 to 2012, women on average filled only 60.5 percent of store manager jobs and 56.9 percent of department manager jobs.

To get ahead, some women disclosed in their statements that they wound up sleeping with the boss.

One woman said in her statement that after she slept with her district manager, he told her "I am now your angel" at Sterling. "I have your back."

Correction:

An earlier version of this article misstated the period covered by an expert report by plaintiffs about the number of women employed at various levels by Sterling. It was 2004 to 2012, not 2003 to 2012.

Correction:

An article on Tuesday about a lawsuit against Sterling Jewelers that shed light on workplace issues misstated part of the name of the school at Cornell where Alexander Colvin is a professor. It is the School of Industrial and Labor Relations, not the School of International Relations. The article also omitted part of the title of a book by Lauren B. Edelman, who discussed internal dispute systems. It is "Working Law: Courts, Corporations and Symbolic Civil Rights," not "Courts, Corporations and Symbolic Civil Rights."

A version of this article appears in print on , on Page B1 of the New York edition with the headline: Jeweler's Policies Masked Abuses, Suit Says. Order Reprints | Today's Paper | Subscribe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sterling Jewelers Suit Casts Light on Wider Policies Hurting Women

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sandra Sargent had finally had enough when a guard at Jared the Galleria of Jewelry in Crestview Hills, Ky., waved his security scanning wand over her buttocks one day in 2007. Several weeks earlier, she said, he had used the same device to brush across her chest.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Beauty and the Beast' Director Talks of 'Exclusively Gay' Moment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bill Condon said that the manservant LeFou, played by Josh Gad, has a "nice, exclusively gay moment" in the Disney film. Commence internet meltdown.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The actor Emma Watson has hit back at critics who say she has betrayed her feminist ideals by posing for a revealing picture in Vanity Fair magazine, in which parts of her breasts were exposed.

The Harry Potter co-star and pioneer of the HeForShe campaign to make men advocate for feminism talked about the photo shoot while promoting her latest film, the Disney live-action picture Beauty and the Beast.

"It just always reveals to me how many misconceptions and what a misunderstanding there is about what feminism is," she said.

"Feminism is about giving women choice. Feminism is not a stick with which to beat other women with. It's about freedom, it's about liberation, it's about equality. I really don't know what my tits have to do with it. It's very confusing.

"I'm confused. Most people are confused. No, I'm just always just quietly stunned."

Maturing from Hermione to Belle in @beautyandthebeast is a true coming-of-age story for @EmmaWatson: "I couldn't care less if I won an Oscar or not if the movie didn't say something that I felt was important for people to hear." Read the full cover story at the link in bio. Photograph by Tim Walker.

A post shared by Vanity Fair (@vanityfair) on

The photo shoot, by the acclaimed fashion photographer Tim Walker, showed Watson in an open, white crocheted bolero jacket with no bra or shirt underneath.

"We'd been doing so many crazy things on that shoot," Watson said, "but it felt incredibly artistic and I've been so creatively involved and engaged with Tim and I'm so thrilled about how interesting and beautiful the photographs were."

The actress was being interviewed by the BBC alongside Dan Stevens, her co-star in Beauty And The Beast.

When he asked what she was discussing, the actress explained: "They were saying that I couldn't be a feminist and ... and have boobs."
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Emma Watson on Vanity Fair cover: 'Feminism is about giving women choice'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The actor Emma Watson has hit back at critics who say she has betrayed her feminist ideals by posing for a revealing picture in Vanity Fair magazine, in which parts of her breasts were exposed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Some female Marines were sent screenshots of nude and private pictures of themselves from concerned colleagues. A few would get texts from their friends alerting them to what was online. Others found vulgar messages from strangers in their inboxes. The red flags were different, but the revelation was the same: Their intimate photos had been shared online without their consent.

Marine officials on Sunday said the branch was looking into a number of Marines, as well as current and former service members, who shared naked and compromising photos of their female colleagues on social media through a shared drive on a Facebook group called Marines United.

The incident has prompted an outcry from senior Marine leaders and an investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, but according to ten current and former female service members interviewed by The Washington Post, online harassment goes well beyond a single shared drive or Facebook group. The behavior has become pervasive in the younger enlisted ranks throughout the Marine Corps, threatening unit cohesion at the lowest levels and its ethos at the highest.

['I'm never reenlisting': Marine Corps rocked by nude-photo scandal]

The existence of the shared drive was first reported through the website Reveal, in conjunction with the War Horse military news website. Many of the women who spoke to The Post for this article did so on the condition of anonymity because they fear reprisals from fellow service members and their chains of command.

The Marine's highest ranking officer, Gen. Robert B. Neller, wouldn't comment on the specific investigation but called the reported postings "distasteful."

"I expect Marines to give their all to be the best human beings, teammates, and Marines possible," Neller said in a statement.

Women who have experienced the public shaming firsthand take a starker view.

"It's Marine Corps wide," said Marine Pvt. Kally Wayne, 22, who joined in 2013 and was removed from the service three years later for disciplinary problems. In early 2016, her ex-boyfriend, a Marine, posted a sex tape they had made in 2013 to a Marines Facebook group, which quickly spread, eventually getting posted on Marines United, which has 30,000 members, where it appeared sporadically.

"I went to the police to get them to take it down and they told me because I didn't live in North Carolina they couldn't do anything," Wayne said. "I went to his command and they said, 'Why don't you not make sex tapes?'"

Wayne said she knows at least 10 other women who have endured online sexual harassment. She said that a meme of her had already appeared on another group after Marines United was taken down after the War Horse article.

It is hard to trace where the Marine Corps' online culture of illicit photo-sharing began. With about 7 percent of its 200,000 strong active duty ranks made up of women, female Marines are vastly outnumbered by their male counterparts. In 2013 and 2014, the Marine Corps Times and the military website Task and Purpose wrote stories about the Marine Facebook group called "Just the Tip of the Spear," commonly known as JTTOTS. The group bills itself as a hub for "some of the camaraderie" that veterans miss after they leave the service. Wayne's video was first posted as a comment on the group in 2016 and was distributed from there, she says.

"I don't know how we got here," said one female Marine whose pictures also appeared on the Marines United group as well other pages and Tumblrs. "A couple years ago, it was just people making fun of other Marines messing up online, now it's this."

Just the Tip of the Spear, like many other Marine Facebook groups that have at one point or another displayed inappropriate pictures, has been taken down numerous times only to reappear in different incarnations with different names or privacy settings. In 2013, Marine Corps officials responded with threats of punishment for those involved with some of the sites and increased briefings on social media awareness.

"Once [my photos] got reported, it would get taken down and go right back up, over and over again," the female Marine said. "The Instagram photos that people shared didn't really bother me, but the private ones I had sent to someone I trusted, only for them to appear everywhere, was horrifying."

She left the service in 2015 and said that just knowing her pictures are still out there has silenced her as a veteran.

"I wanted to be a positive influence on the community," she said. "And this diminished me. It took away everything. My voice didn't matter because my nudes were out there."

Another female Marine who recently completed the once male-only infantry training with hopes of joining an infantry unit said that she used to read the comments on news articles about the Marine Corps' resistance to integrating women into combat jobs as motivation. In recent months, however, the amount of hate she has seen on the Internet has slowly broken her down.

Last year, when people heard she had gone through infantry training, someone took benign pictures of her from her Facebook profile and posted them in a closed group without her knowledge, prompting a slew of harassing remarks a fellow Marine eventually alerted her to, she said.

"Right now I'm supposed to be able to trust every male Marine," she said. "And with some of the stuff I see them saying about women, that's just not happening."

"When did being so misogynistic become a part the culture?" she asked. "When did being so [awful] become a character trait?"

In the roughly two days since War Horse broke the Marines United story, it is unclear how various Marine units are taking the news. One male infantry Marine, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of his active duty status, said, "No one I know is taking it seriously," and that this kind of harassing activity will probably continue.

A female U.S. Army soldier who had casual pictures of her taken from her Instagram account and posted in a closed Marine group in recent months was baffled at how pages like Marines United and others continued to exist.

"If someone in the Army created a page like this, it would have been gone a long time ago," she said of Marines United. "I feel like in the other branches females have more respect. Men in the Marines, they don't take women in the military seriously. The other branches are like brothers and sisters, whereas in the Marine Corps it's a brotherhood that doesn't have room for women."

Read more:
How the Marines' new physical standards for combat jobs weed out men and women
After historic graduation, Army removes all restrictions on women attending Ranger School Ranger School officer combats rumors about how women passed in pointed Facebook post

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'It's Marine Corps wide': Female Marines detail harassment in wake of nude photos scandal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some female Marines were sent screenshots of nude and private pictures of themselves from concerned colleagues. A few would get texts from their friends alerting them to what was online. Others found vulgar messages from strangers in their inboxes. The red flags were different, but the revelation was the same: Their intimate photos had been shared online without their consent.

# data[].attributes.body
Never before

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One Facebook post by a retired attorney in Hawaii in November after the 2016 election surprised many by the way it stirred emotions in millions of women worldwide - so much that they took to the streets the day after the inauguration of President Trump. From social sharing to social movement, photojournalist Kisha Bari witnessed the transformation of the women and the movement. Inspired by the photographs taken of activist leaders like the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, Bari approached the women planning the March on Washington, driven by her desire to historically document their passion and contribution.

The planning, led by activists Paola Mendoza, Carmen Perez, Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour, began in New York and then moved to the Watergate Hotel in Washington, D.C. Meetings were held in multiple offices, on floors, in hallways and were focused on moving forward and getting it all done. Logistics and diversity were a priority. Bari documented the 25 core organizers and over 100 associate organizers, including strategic advisers, social media planners and hundreds of volunteers.

"Together the group of women were very powerful," Bari said. "There was a sense of sisterhood in that office." There was some anxiety, but Bari said there "were also super-excited moments like when they received a supportive phone call from someone they admired." Bari recalled a memorable moment when the women began singing "The Greatest Love of All" by Whitney Houston when they were in a meeting.

At the Watergate Hotel, the organizers were careful to keep their identities to themselves to prevent any threat to the event. There were some tense moments when they rode elevators alongside inauguration attendees dressed in ball gowns and met Trump supporters in the hotel lobby or bar.

On the day of the march, Bari started at 5 a.m., photographing early meetings and walk-throughs. She said, "Watching the marchers arrive during that three-hour period was phenomenal, incredibly emotional. ... I've never seen anything like it."

While they initially planned only a one-day event, these women have continued organizing. On International Women's Day, the organizers behind the Women's March planned "A Day Without a Woman." In an interview with the Associated Press, Women's March spokeswoman Cassady Findlay said the organizers were inspired by the recent "Day Without an Immigrant" protests held last month. "We do all of this and get paid less than men, get sexually harassed, get inadequate family leave," Findlay said. "We provide all this value and keep the system going, and receive unequal benefits from it."

More on In Sight: The photos you haven't seen of Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail These moving photos show what it feels like to see the ocean for the first time 'Everybody was a dandy then.' These portraits of celebrities in 1920s Paris launched Berenice Abbott's career

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Perspective | Never-before-seen photos behind the scenes at the Women's March

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One Facebook post by a retired attorney in Hawaii in November after the 2016 election surprised many by the way it stirred emotions in millions of women worldwide - so much that they took to the streets the day after the inauguration of President Trump.