U.S. Sanctions On Iran Are So Bad, Women Have Run Out of Birth Control

Iran has never been touted as a bastion of human rights, economic equality, or political freedom. But although many of Iran’s problems can be blamed on the regime itself, the U.S. is increasingly playing a major hand in hurting the innocent bystanders of an international chess game between itself and its Persian adversary.

Iran is facing a growing health crisis due to international sanctions levied against the regime. Many essential medicines including birth control, cancer treatment drugs, and equipment needed to maintain vital hospital functions are becoming increasingly scarce.

Iran’s leadership is not free from blame. Former President Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Khamenei did little to alleviate the problem, but when digging a little deeper, it becomes apparent that there may not be much they can do short of completely revamping Iran’s political, economic, and military architecture.

The U.S.-led push to sanction Iran into space has made it extraordinarily difficult to ship anything to the country, not just medicine, which is supposed to be protected from the grip of such action. But given that banks and shipping companies face stiff fines for breaking any type of sanctions law, it has become excruciatingly difficult to find anyone willing or able to send medicine to Iran with speed and in necessary bulk. As a result, Iranians are forced to rely on expensive and sketchy black market medicines.

Further, even if Iran were to slowly moderate their tone in exchange for certain concessions from the West, it may not be fast enough given the extreme level of difficulty in removing sanctions against the country. Not only have such sanctions become law, necessitating an act of Congress to overturn, but powerful lobbying organizations like the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) will make it nearly impossible to do so.

U.S. lawmakers recently announced a bill for another painful round of sanctions against the country, in essence giving the middle finger to the new Iranian president, who actually ran on a platform of easing sanctions against his country.

Even Iran’s wily Chief of General Staff Hassan Firouzabadi recently said that the military is ready to remove itself from economic activity, a vital step toward easing sanctions against his country. But given that the U.S. is playing power politics with this new round of economic jabs, Iran may be helpless, regardless of the concessions the regime is willing to make.

As is all too common, cold wars, no matter the size, tend to hurt the citizens of involved countries while pushing the leadership to double down on faulty doctrine. Unless more moderate, creative, and brighter minds prevail on both sides, the beleaguered majorities will continue to endure the fallout.

Click here to view original article

Read More

National Zoo Tiger Cubs Are a Reminder Of How Much We Need Zoos

Earlier this week, two Sumatran tigers were born at Washington's National Zoo. Kids and big cat enthusiasts will be delighted — there are only about 500 of these tigers left in the wild. With 65 of these tigers now in captivity in the U.S. alone, and breeding programs like these a key objective, what should the role of zoos be in preserving species? Ideally, they should maintain close linkages with conservation programs in preserved habitats and raise awareness about wider environmental issues through the use of charismatic animals.

Roughly about 15% of threatened bird, reptile, mammal and amphibian species are currently in zoos. No zoo's breeding program is intended for a species to persist entirely in captivity. There have been great successes over the years — Przewalski's horse, the black-footed ferret, and the California Condor for example — have all been successfully bred in captivity and reintroduced into habitats. They were all on the brink of extinction and have made it back successfully.

Of course, some disagree with the use of zoos. PETA declares, "Despite their professed concern for animals, zoos can more accurately be described as 'collections' of interesting animals than as actual havens or homes." The standard of care in zoos varies wildly and there is indeed in terrible abuse. Moreover, increased stress levels from captivity inhibit the fecundity of some species. That hampers the objective of keeping these species in captivity in the first place.

Overall, those like PETA get it wrong. Zoos are indeed collections of animals, not homes. But they exist because of habitat destruction and species exploitation and are a stopgap measure against complete extinction. Those that are not for-profit operations are major components in a network of scientific institutions looking to implement what is known about the state of different species and improve the situation.

While zoos work on those issues, they also use it to raise awareness with the wider public. A lot of our modern concern with the loss of species has to do with the proliferation of zoos, nature films, and other cultural products that allow us to have experiences with nature.

But at the same time, that representational function only goes so far. When it comes to the crisis of biodiversity, the threat to the sum of all life, charismatic megafauna are only part of the story. It's biodiversity as a whole that matters. It is a potent source of innovation for medicine as a well of genetic diversity, direct use as natural resources, and as critical actors in the biogeochemical cycles that govern planetary functioning.

No matter how you spin it, the crucial nitrogen-fixing fungus or the photosynthetic phytoplankton is not going to catch the public's eye like a magnificent Sumatran tiger. We need zoos to preserve them, both for their potential role in their natural habitats, and to inspire us, as kids and grown-ups, to realize just how important biodiversity is.

Click here to view original article

Read More

Why Are Chinese Workers At Apple Suppliers Foxconn and Pegatron Trying to Commit Suicide?

Tian Yu, a 17-year old Chinese employee of Foxconn, Apple’s chief supplier and manufacturer of tablet and smart phone devices, was in a coma for 12 days after her suicide attempt.

At Foxconn, her managers made her work over 12 hours a day, often without a day off for up to two weeks, and attend unpaid work meetings on top of that. Tian Yu’s demanding work schedule in Foxconn’s sweatshop-like conditions forced her to skip meals and accept the manufacturer’s restricted toilet break policy. Her resolve eventually cracked when the company didn’t pay her the meager month’s wages of approximately $215 due to an alleged administrative error, prompting her to jump out of her dormitory window.

In 2010 alone, 18 workers, all of whom were 25 and younger, attempted to jump to their deaths. This is no doubt why Foxconn placed a net below its employee’s dormitories. Foxconn’s blatant worker rights abuses and sweat shop-like conditions on their assembly line is indicative of a wider problem in the consumer electronics industry: The general unwillingness of both companies and their vendors to truly regulate and improve workers’ conditions.

Manufacturers like Foxconn predatorily target young, poor migrants from the countryside to work at their abysmal factories due to their economic and social vulnerability. Once there, Foxconn crowds them into dorms and assembly lines to begin work with absolutely no training. The shift begins with managers asking the employees “how are you?” The staff must reply “good, very good, very very good.” After that, the overseers enforce silence throughout the remainder of the shift.

Despite Foxconn’s draconian worker conditions and policies, they make razor-thin profit margins on the tablets and smart phones that they sell to Apple. To ensure a slim profit, Foxconn likely feels it must employ ethically and productively dubious management policies, enforcing inhumanely long hours and low pay.

To give further incentive to Foxconn’s behavior, the manufacturer is now competing with Pegatron for Apple’s business as CEO Tim Cook seeks to diversify the company’s supply chain. Although Apple and Pegatron both refuse to comment on the terms of their arrangement, the Wall Street Journal reports that Pegatron will accept even lower profit margins.

As expected in conjunction with lower profits, Pegatron tries to recuperate its losses, shifting the burden onto its employees to produce more and more as quickly as possible, unsurprisingly leading to more horror stories. China Labor Watch documents Pegatron’s abuse towards its 70,000 employees as it takes business from Foxconn. The labor rights organization found that conditions at Pegatron were even worse than at Foxconn, with 86 labor rights violations, including child labor, withholding employee pay, excessive hours, and taking employee identity cards so that they cannot leave. To add insult to injury, Pegatron factories also pollute the local water supply.

In 2012 Apple had to introduce labor reform regulations for its manufacturers due to public pressure over conditions in its Foxconn factories stemming from a comprehensive report from the Fair Labor Association. Nonetheless, Apple largely enables Foxconn and Pegatron to ignore its own labor policies, rendering the 2013 Apple Supplier Responsibility Progress Report little more than a PR smokescreen.

In the report, Apple stipulates a cap of 60 hours per week for employees, except in unusual circumstances wherein the employer can exceed that cap. In contrast, unenforced Chinese labor laws cap hours at 49 per week, meaning that the Chinese government has more rigorous labor rights standards than Apple. In violation of both Apple regulations and Chinese labor laws, most Pegatron employees work 66 to 69 hours per week while Tian Yu likely worked over 84 hours per week at Foxconn.

Despite Apple CEO Tim Cook’s token calls on his suppliers to improve working conditions, Apple has not provided any assistance, financial or otherwise, to implement more rigorous employee protections. It has not even considered renegotiating its contracts with Foxconn and Pegatron more favorably, which would allow the manufacturers more flexibility in implementing basic human rights standards as the managers wouldn’t need to resort to such extreme, inhumane measures just to turn a narrow profit. When the Guardian tried to reach Apple’s press office for comment, it told the news outlet that “it did not discuss such matters,” instead referring it to the toothless supplier responsibility report.

Although Apple, the industry giant, is naturally taking the most heat for its ethically dubious worker’s rights practices, China Labor Watch also found that Samsung’s suppliers practiced the same human rights violations in its factories. This is clearly an industry-wide problem and if electronics companies continue to shift all the blame onto the suppliers it chooses, rather than step up and take concrete action, suppliers will continue to abuse their workers.

Click here to view original article

Read More

What One Year At PolicyMic Has Taught Me About Growth

Editor's Note: Every Thursday, I'll be rounding up my favorite pieces from the past week so that PolicyMic Pundits can more easily read and comment on the great content being written about sex, sexuality, gender, and race in politics and culture, in addition to updates from our community and GIFs galore! You can subscribe to get updates delivered straight to your inbox.

On Monday, PolicyMic moved into our new office space. Our move has been a long time in the making. The space which comfortably housed 8-12 people when I began at PolicyMic (one year ago next week!) can no longer contain our operation.

While we tend to think of our growth in terms of numbers, tools, and systems, growth can also be defined as a process toward fulfillment. PolicyMic is a young operation with a young staff working for young people. As our numbers multiply, our attention must turn from expansion to maturation. We must consider what our contributions to our community mean. As more and more people gain access to new ways to tell their stories, at PolicyMic and beyond, it can be harder and harder to actually hear the stories we're constantly being bombarded with. Instead, we are more and more focused on telling our own story in response ... as we should be, since certain stories are still lost, certain stories are still not told, certain stories are still devalued, and certain stories are still suppressed.

So how to distinguish? As Professor Matthew Kaiser argues, "We have convinced ourselves that creation is intrinsically meaningful. We create for the sake of creating, as though the act of making something — money, ideas, babies, art, technology, love — were an end in itself, a self-evidently good thing. As any true artist will tell you, however, it is the grinding work of taking care of those created things, nurturing and cultivating them, that gives them value. To appreciate means to hold onto something."

What is often lost in all the excitement over platforms like PolicyMic is what they are actually used to create. An explosion of user-generated content — a proliferation of stories — is all well and good in the age of the online curator, but what of the work of the web editor?

For me, editing is the work of appreciating, recognizing the quality, significance or magnitude of, being fully aware of, being thankful for. It's been the utmost of pleasures to have grown as your editor in the past year, and to watch you grow.

I'm on vacation next week, so here's an extra GIF to tide you over:

Updates From Our Pundits:

Join our community for a two-day discussion of the 'b-word' and LGBTQ rights in Russia organized by Liz Plank and Jake Horowitz, featuring contributions from Olympic athletes, LGBT activists, elected officials, and PolicyMic Pundits. Not sure what's happening? Be sure to read Jared Milrad's excellent piece from last week, "This Dutch Activist Was Arrested For Even Talking About Gay Rights in Russia."

Pundit Jaclyn Munson profiles editor Liz Plank at Onward and F-Word. (Speaking of Liz Plank, can you spot her appearance in this article by Syreeta McFadden at Feministing?)

Check out Wagatwe Wanjuki on The Daily Show!

Congratulations to PolicyMic's Suzanna Bobadilla, Wagatwe Wanjuki, and the other folks involved in launching the new Know Your IX website this week!

What did you do last week? I'll share any outstanding writing achievements in our community, and highlight the great work that all of our Pundits do offline as well. If you have anything you'd like for me to include about yourself or a fellow PM writer, please send it along!

Must Reads From Last Week:

Why I’m Proud to Be a Part Of Know Your IX (Suzanna Bobadilla, @suzbobadilla) — Everyone should take notice of the anti-sexual-violence movement's newest digital resource
[4 Mics, 1 Comments, 4 Shares]

Women Buy Designer Products to Keep Their Men (Easha Acharya, @eashakiren) — The University of Minnesota has published a new study that claims that female consumers buy designer items to shield their significant other from female rivals
[11 Mics, 18 Comments, 1 Shares]

Manhattan: The New Suburban Sprawl (Chloe Stillwell, @chloekillwell) — Gentrifiers have to take responsibility for gentrifying, and until they can acknowledge that truth and harness its power for good, big business will keep replacing your bars with Starbucks.
[10 Mics, 5 Comments, 3 Shares]

Here's How to Grow New Farmers (Meredith Slater, @merslater) — Monterey, California-based cooperative ALBA Organics is teaching migratory workers how to start, develop, and operate their own organic farms.
[7 Mics, 12 Comments, 8 Shares]

This Ohio Town Will Discriminate Against Minority Commuters Even If It Costs Them Millions (Pierce Willans) — The Beavercreek City Council in Ohio is fighting a federal order that it approve bus stops into its community that carry minority riders, or face a loss of federal funds.
[4 Mics, 26 Comments, 26 Shares]

Why Did the Media Ignore Yesterday’s Immigration Reform Rallies? (Matthew Rozsa, @MatthewRozsa) —The media gave the Tea Party ample demonstration during its various protests. Why aren't liberal grassroots movements being treated similarly?
[7 Mics, 12 Comments, 21 Shares]

3 Women’s Issue Stories I’m Tired Of Reading (Natalie Smith, @Nsmith10) — The stories about women that we need to stop writing.
[21 Mics, 55 Comments, 76 Shares]

Here’s How You Know We’re Not Living in a Post-Racial Society (Luke Waggoner, @lukewaggon) — In quick succession, a case about affirmative action at the University of Texas and a verdict in the Trayvon Martin case remind us we've got a long way to go.
[5 Mics, 15 Comments, 13 Shares]

Can This Superhero Save Pakistan? (Sania Salman) — The first animated series produced in Pakistan, Burka Avenger, proves to be a promising way to address social injustices in the country. So why is the superhero's costume such a hot topic?
[21 Mics, 21 Comments, 217 Shares]

The GOP Backlash to Climate Change Deniers Begins Now (Christopher Round, What One Year At PolicyMic Has Taught Me About Growth@CRoundJudoBio) — The heads of the EPA under Reagan, Nixon, and both Bush administrations call for action on climate change, and they're not alone.
[7 Mics, 53 Comments, 51 Shares]

Thanks for reading! Please encourage friends to subscribe here. Send me your feedback, give me a tip for what I should be reading, and tell me how I can do better: sam@policymic.com.

Subscribe to Sam Meier's Feminist Weekly

Click here to view original article

Read More

10 Memes to Help You Celebrate Eid

Eid is here! After one tough month of hunger and thirst, you're done with Ramadan. That means its time to indulge in all the things you've been avoiding all month. Think of all the food you can eat now, all the water you can drink, and all the awkward Eid hugs you're going to have to give. No more mandatory praying with the family. No more watching television all day because there is nothing else to do. It's Eid! Dig in; you're hungry. Until next year, Ramadan. Until next year.

1. Bye, Ramadan. Hello, Eid!

Via: Diylol.com

2. Back To Chain Smoking

Via: Ramadan Memes

3. Early Eid. Haram?

Via: Ramadan Memes

4. Break That Fast, Pack on Those Lost Pounds

Via: Ramadan Memes

5. Bring It In ... So Many Unwanted Eid Hugs

Via: S Photos

6. You're Never Too Old For An Eid Gift

Via: Angry Pakistan Blogger

7. Skinny Never Felt So Hungry

Via: SomeECards

8. We Can All Look Up Now

Via: Ramadan.sg

9. It's Eid! No More Rules

Via: troll.me

10. Apology Accepted?

Via: SomeECards

Click here to view original article

Read More

How Many Terror Threats Does the U.S. Get Every Day?

On Sunday, the U.S. closed 21 embassies across North Africa and the Middle East and plans to keep 19 of them closed through Saturday. The State Department said that the closings were made out of “an overabundance of caution,” as the intelligence community has reported high risk of a major attack in the works by Al-Qaeda’s cell in Yemen, known as Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Some have said that the current threat is the most serious since 9/11. Some European nations have also closed their Yemen embassies as a result.

The closings come as the Obama administration also struggles to defend controversial NSA surveillance programs. But just how unusual is the threat behind the current embassy closings?

Twelve years after the start of the “Global War on Terror,” administration officials have been keen to say that Al-Qaeda and similar terrorist organizations have been severely weakened. This is especially true after the death of Osama bin Laden. But a State Department report has also stated that as terrorist organizations become more fragmented, the threat they pose becomes more diffuse. Affiliates in other parts of the world have become more independent.

Those diffuse threats translate into literally thousands of tips about terrorism threats every day. In 2010, the FBI’s online tip line alone received an average of 700 messages a day. Then there are the tips from people calling in to local authorities, walking into embassies to make a report, and, of course, the “chatter” we’ve been hearing about in announcements about the weekend’s embassy closings. All told, the National Counterterrorism Center gets about 8,000-10,000 potential threats a day.

The intelligence community learned about this latest threat after intercepting communications between Ayman al-Zawahri, Al-Qaeda’s new leader, and Nasser al Wuhayshi, the leader of AQAP. Officials said it was unusual for such high-level operatives to communicate directly about an attack, which is why the intercepted communication led to such a major response from the U.S.

AQAP has become the most powerful and operationally active Al-Qaeda affiliate, despite the administration’s ongoing drone campaign in Yemen. This has led some experts to question the efficacy of the drone campaign.

In a New York Times interview, Princeton Yemen scholar and author Gregory Johnsen asked, “If the Obama administration is confident that its strategy in Yemen is correct, then why is Al-Qaeda growing in Yemen and why is the group still capable of forcing the U.S. to shut down embassies in more than a dozen countries?”

Click here to view original article

Read More

Mic Check: This Photo Perfectly Sums Up Obama’s Relationship With Putin

1. Obama Cancels High-Profile Meeting With Putin

President Obama on Wednesday canceled a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin scheduled for September; it was the first time since the Cold War the U.S. has canceled plans with Russia. The White House cited a range of issues, including Edward Snowden’s asylum and human rights issues, as reasons for canceling the meeting. The canceled meeting could jeopardize a nuclear arms reduction Obama has been trying to hammer out with Putin and hamper efforts to end the conflict in Syria: The U.S. needs Russia to pressure Bashar al-Assad to step down.

More from around the web:
• This photo perfectly sums up Obama’s relationship with Putin (WaPo).

• Russia wants Edward Snowden’s advice on cybersecurity (CS Monitor).

More from PolicyMic:
• The Cold War Between Obama and Putin Just Heated Up Big Time (Rachel George)


2. Women Accuse San Diego Mayor Of Preying On Vets

Two women veterans accused San Diego Mayor Bob Filner of sexual harassment on Wednesday, bringing the total number of claims against Filner to 13. Eldonna Fernandez and Gerri Tindley say Filner used his connections with a veterans group to take advantage of vulnerable women. Tara Jones, the president of the National Women’s Veterans Association of America, says 7 or 8 of her members have received unwanted sexual attention from Filner; most of them are survivors of sexual assault. Filner entered a two-week therapy program on Monday but says he will not resign.

More from around the web:
• Here are the stories of the 13 women who have come forward against Filner (Atlantic).

• The NY Times has a video of vets describing Filner’s unwanted advances.

More from PolicyMic:
• We Don’t Care About Politician’s Sex Lives, We Care About Their Lies (John Giokaris)


3. Study Finds Military Suicides Not Linked to Combat

A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association this week says the recent spike in military suicides may not be linked to deployment or exposure to combat. Researchers looked at data from 2001-2008 and found the risk factors for suicide in the military were the same as for civilians. However, the study says war increases hardship on soldiers and may heighten other risk factors. “Perhaps it’s not being deployed so much as being in a war during a high-stress time period,” said the principal investigator for the center that provided the study’s data.

More from around the web:
• This soldier’s tragic suicide note illustrates the toll war takes on veterans (Gawker).

More from PolicyMic:

• How Many Soldiers’ Suicides Will It Take For Us to Change Our Foreign Policy? (Robert Taylor)


4. Japanese Nuclear Plant Leaking Waste Into Pacific

A Japanese official revealed on Wednesday that the Fukushima nuclear plant is leaking 300 tons of water contaminated with nuclear waste into the Pacific Ocean every day. The plant was damaged by the tsunami that struck Japan in 2011, and it’s possible contaminated water has been leaking ever since. The Independent says experts believe the leak will require the most complex nuclear clean up the world has ever seen. It could take over 40 years and $11 billion to reverse the damage from the contaminated water.

More from around the web:
• National Geographic has incredible footage of the tsunami that ravaged Japan.

More from PolicyMic:
• The Fukushima Nuclear Plant is Still Leaking 300 Tons Of Waste a Day (Nick Demas)

5. Researchers Announce Groundbreaking Privacy Agreement

Health officials announced an unprecedented agreement on Wednesday that looks to balance scientific advancement with the need for privacy. The agreement concerns the cells of Henrietta Lacks, a poor black woman who died in 1951 from cervical cancer. The cells from Lacks’ tumor have been used in more than 74,000 studies since her death. The National Institutes of Health and Lacks’ family agreed to store Henrietta’s genome in a private database in response to two studies that would have made her genetic info available to the public. Scientists will have to balance research and privacy for years to come: Researcher Eric Lander says “tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands” of patients will have to share their genetic info for scientists to cure cancer.

More from around the web:
• How scientists are teaming up to end cancer (TIME).

More from PolicyMic:
• Would You Sell Your DNA For Better Facebook Ads? (Andrea Ayres-Deets)


DESSERT
• Inside McDonald’s efforts to win over millennials with the McWrap (Bloomberg).

• This is what happens when a porn star finds God (BuzzFeed).

• What's making the monkeys at this Dutch zoo act so strangely? (NPR)

• Find out how exercise affects how you learn (Well).

• Guess which continent is home to 14 of the 15 most optimistic countries? (PolicyMic)


Thanks for reading!
Nick

Want do you think about the topics in today’s Mic Check? What’s more important, patients’ privacy or scientific research? Share your thoughts with me on Twitter @nicholascbaker.

Share Mic Check and help your friends stay informed: http://eepurl.com/of1jj.

Click here to view original article

Read More

I'm An Openly Gay Gold Medalist and I Reject the Sochi Olympics Boycott

As an openly gay Olympic four-time gold medalist, you might expect that I would be in favor of joining prominent LGBT activists in calling for America to boycott the 2014 Winter Olympic games in Sochi, Russia.

After all, Russia’s recently passed laws cracking down on gays and lesbians violate everything I’ve spent my career fighting for; namely, love and respect for all people. It was hard enough to compete as a gay, closeted athlete in the United States. It’s hard to imagine what it must be like for gay athletes in Russia, knowing that if you were to come out, you would be considered a criminal and could lose everything you’ve worked your entire life to achieve.

READ: Russia's Anti-Gay Law, Spelled Out in Plain English

But while I’m strongly opposed to Vladimir Putin’s treatment of the LGBT community and will fight hard to reverse these heinous laws, I do not support a U.S. boycott of the Sochi Games.

Boycotting sends the wrong message and will only harm the hard-working athletes set to compete in the 2014 Olympics, not the Russian government itself. I know from personal experience. My first Olympics I won Silver at age 16, and then in 1980, at the height of my diving career, President Jimmy Carter opted to boycott the 1980 Olympics in Moscow as a method of protesting the Soviet invasion in Afghanistan. The toll on fellow athletes and me was devastating. We had trained our entire lives for that one moment. Fortunately, I was lucky enough to continue my diving career and return to compete and win two gold medals in the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles (an Olympics the Eastern Block counties boycotted) and repeat two gold medals in 1988 Olympics in Seoul. But, other athletes were not so lucky. Some of those who missed the 1980 games never had another chance to shine. This boycott hurt the wrong people, taking a toll on prominent athletes more than the country it targeted.

I’m concerned the same would be true today. There are far too many athletes for whom the 2014 Sochi Olympics represents their only chance at success. A boycott will only hurt these athletes’ careers.

There’s a better way to speak out against President Putin and call out his bigotry for exactly what it is: speaking up for equal rights and educating people around the world about the persistence of homophobia. I’ve spent my post-diving career doing just this. I’ve promoted HIV/AIDS awareness, defended the civil liberties of the LGBT community, and taken a stand against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Rather than boycott, I, along with several amazing organizations including Athlete Ally and All Out, plan to use the Sochi Games as a teachable moment for the world.

Along with other athletes, I will continue to speak up about these disgusting laws which discriminate against gays and lesbians. I’ve signed this petition aimed directly at the International Olympic Committee, urging the IOC to condemn Russia’s anti-gay laws before the Olympics.

As athletes, the most valuable thing we can do is send a strong, unified message to Russia and its president that we will not stand for this cruel and repressive treatment. We will not stop until gay people in Russia are treated with the dignity and respect they deserve.

Athlete Ally has teamed up with All Out to launch a petition calling on world leaders to speak out against Russia's anti-gay laws. 335,000 people have already signed on. Find out more here.

Athlete Ally is a non profit organization dedicated to challenging homophobia and transphobia in sports. Follow them on Twitter: @athleteally, on Facebook, & visit: www.athleteally.org

Click here to view original article

Read More

Not Even Promising 50 Years Of Secrecy Can Get Congress to Cooperate

In a last ditch effort for tax reform legislation, the top two members of the Senate Finance Committee, Democratic Chairman Max Baucus and Republican Orrin Hatch, assured their fellow senators that any suggestions offered would be kept secret for 50 years. Baucus and Hatch have realized, apparently, that the only way to get anything done in Congress in its current climate of gridlock and finger pointing is to promise mum’s the word for five decades. Yes, this is an utter failure of Congress and its ability to govern, but it is also a failure of a media that exists to mediate the relationship between the government and the public, yet refuses to hold elected leaders accountable and seems content to facilitate this sort of non-governance.

The state of affairs in Congress is bleak when senators agree to do their job only if everyone else promises not to tell. An aide for the Senate Finance Committee described the secrecy measures proposed by Baucus and Hatch as "standard operating procedure for sensitive materials." Since when is legislative debate on tax reform considered sensitive material? Why are senators only willing to offer suggestions for reform if their names remain unattributed? The only explanation is that a major divide exists between what these senators truly believe and what they're willing to cop to in public. Otherwise there would be no need for 50 years of secrecy. Yet any public suggestion for tax reform is seen as a concession to the other side — a depressing reality encouraged by a media intent on presenting every issue as a contest.

Framing every story as who's winning versus who's losing rather than presenting an accurate analysis of policy and legislation creates a political environment where the players are afraid — scared into silence, in fact — to do anything that might resemble working with the other team. Ezra Klein for the Washington Post gets to the heart of the matter: "If the opposition party doesn't want to cut a deal, there won't be a deal. And if all coverage of policy is colored by that core political decision, then there'll never be real pressure on them to make a deal, either."

It's a vicious cycle. Republicans don't want any successful legislation to come out of the senate while under a Democratic majority, so they're unwilling to compromise. An unwillingness to compromise means nothing gets done, which leaves the media little to cover but the very gridlock that halts the political process, which in turn motivates Republicans to continue to abstain from governing. Republicans aren't necessarily solely to blame here, as Democrats would likely do the same if the tables were turned, but the fact of the matter is nothing is getting done and the media only seems to want to cover policy in the context of how likely it is to pass (and everything, it seems, is unlikely).

Take, for example, the new push for tax reform after President Barack Obama's recent economy-focused speeches. A headline of a story in The Washington Post tags on the line that Obama's proposals were "quickly rejected by GOP." The New York Times describes Baucus and Hatch’s plan for tax reform as a "Lonely Bipartisan Push," suggesting that anything involving a negotiation between the two parties is dead on arrival.

If the senate discussion on tax reform featured named senators making public suggestions, perhaps there would be a productive analysis of legislation for the media to cover. Instead, however, we have senators giving anonymous tips that will be put on ice for 50 years and a media presenting the issue as a non-starter, leaving the public little chance to influence the governance that is, supposedly, for them and by them. All we're left with is failed coverage of a failed government.

Click here to view original article

Read More

Lady Gaga's 'Burqa' is Supposed to Empower Muslim Women, But Does the Opposite

Just like it happened before the release of many of her other albums, one of the songs off Lady Gaga's upcoming album ARTPOP was leaked on Monday. The song, titled “Burqa/Aura,” is already taking the internet by storm and scores of fans are commenting on what appears to be a demo of the song. As catchy as it might be, the lyrics of the song present troubling portrayals of Muslim women. The recurring, sexualized portrayals of women who wear the burqa, niqab, hijab, or any covering for that matter reduce the image of Muslim women to mystifying, erotic shells of people whose garb entices others to “take a peek.” Such portraits not only come off as incredibly offensive, they perpetuate an all-too-common, orientalist image of Muslim women being voiceless and seen purely as an item to be used for sex.

The lyrics at first listen come off as encouraging, even empowering to women with lines such as, “I’m not a wandering slave, I’m a woman of choice … My veil is protection for the gorgeousness of my face.” Such lines echo what many Muslim women say are their reasons for wearing the hijab, niqab, or burqa. But following this, the song's lyrics quickly take a turn for the cringe-worthy. The chorus goes: “Do you want to see me naked, lover? Do you want to peek underneath the cover? Do you want to see the girl who lives behind the aura? ... Do you wanna touch me? Let’s make love.”

These lines cast women who wear the veil as far-removed figures from another world. The heavily erotic images ultimately dehumanize and degrade burqa-wearing women and turn them into animalistic beings. In a society that automatically associates the burqa with Muslim women and Middle Eastern culture, a song like this only adds onto the monolithic image of the Muslim woman being quiet, sheltered, and owned by a man.

Even in at the art associated with this song that came out earlier this year, Lady Gaga is shown wearing a hot-pink and translucent burqa, with platform shoes and the shape of her body visible through the garment. Of course Lady Gaga is well known for her lavish, colorful, and outlandish wardrobe, but appropriating the burqa in such a way to turn it into an erotic, revealing garment is outright offensive. We are already seeing ignorant reactions from many fans of the song who have taken to wearing a burqa (in many cases actually a niqab, for those who bother to distinguish between them) with no sensitivity towards women who wear one out of observance and choice.

From both a feminist and a Muslim perspective these lyrics are troublesome. This kind of erotic portrayal of women wearing the burqa is part of what makes Islamophobia a pressing, rampant issue in the Western world. It’s images like this that make us view these women as distant, otherworldly figures. It’s images like this that strip Muslim women of any individual identity and reduce them into hypersexualized beings lacking tangible, human qualities. For a pop star to knowingly portray Muslim women who cover in such a way isn't artistic. It's irresponsible.

Muslim women are individuals. They do not belong to a monolithic group. They do not all cover in the same way. Many don’t even cover at all. They have varying sexualities, and opinions on modesty. The statement Lady Gaga is making here not only shows her ignorance of this fact, but also demonstrates the pressing need for us to move on from such simplistic and damaging views of Muslim women.

Listen to the demo here.

Click here to view original article

Read More

Why I'm Proud to Be a Part Of Know Your IX

Just this week, Know Your IX, a fantastic new anti-sexual-violence campaign, was launched into the Great Wide World of the Interwebs. Know Your IX seeks to educate college students across the United States about their rights under Title IX, a law that prohibits universities and colleges from gender-based discrimination (it’s more than just sports, y’all). Know Your IX has created a digital repository for related information. In addition to providing plainly worded summaries of federal laws, Know Your IX empowers college students by sharing survivor-activists’ advice, from the best practices for campus change, to weighing the pros and cons of taking legal action, to dealing with the myriad issues that confront survivor-activists.

A Know Your IX contributor myself, I was humbled to click through and read the brilliant pieces written by other Know Your IX-ers. And I have been thrilled to see key constituents of the anti-sexual violence movement greet Know Your IX with open and welcoming arms. However, my excitement for this campaign extends well beyond my own involvement. Know Your IX marks an innovative step in the fight to eradicate rape on America’s college campus, as it features crowd-sourced testimony from the very people who are at the front lines of this movement. The result? A campaign that empowers change-making millennial writers and readers across the country.

Image courtesy Know Your IX.

As Know Your IX frequently reminds its readers, most of the site's contributors are not lawyers or experts. Rather than a liability, I find the student survivor-activists' perspectives to be the campaign’s greatest strength. One of Know Your IX's codirectors, Alexandra Brodsky, told me that, “there are a lot of organizations with far greater legal and political expertise than we have, but what Know Your IX has to offer is that this collective is able to address common issues that are often overlooked by those who aren't on the ground.” This direct perspective results in articles about how to build support networks, deal with school retaliation, and cope with activist burnout and self care, concerns that might not be obvious to someone who lacks first-hand experience. While organizations like the National Women’s Law Center and the ACLU feature Title IX resources, Know Your IX can address questions about the day-to-day experience of survivor-activist life.

In line with its grassroots philosophy, Know Your IX seeks to confront the stereotypes of a, "'default' survivor who is a white, straight, able-bodied, legally documented, wealthy cis woman.” Know Your IX includes articles about how to deal with prejudice as a male survivor, how to handle homophobia, resources that address sexual violence's intersection with immigration status, and advice on contending with administrative and intramovement racism. The site also provides advice on how Title IX can protect trans* students. Know Your IX has successfully provided a resource for all college students. Encouraging widespread, collaborative action by people with diverse gender identities and expressions, sexualities, classes, races, and nationalities is one of the strongest strategies in the campaign to abolish sexual violence. After all, as the Department of Education states “anyone who believes there has been an act of discrimination on the basis of sex against any person or group in a program or activity that receives [Department of Education] financial assistance may file a complaint.”

Image courtesy Know Your IX.

Excitingly, Know Your IX bridges a gap between digital resources and real-world activism. Its web presence acknowledges the importance of online networks in the current movement. According to Brodsky, “We always conceived of the campaign as an online project, in large part because that's where almost all of us connected in the first place. As a social media campaign and website, Know Your IX can reach people beyond our limited set of campuses and quickly respond to visitors' feedback.”

Interested in joining the cause? Sign up here to become a member of the Know Your IX Action Team andWhy I'm Proud to Be a Part Of Know Your IX help spread the word. In addition to spreading its message via social media, Know Your IX encourages survivor-activists to place ads in their campus papers or to poster their campus with Title IX fact sheets. By providing guides on how to engage with activism beyond sharing or tweeting, Know Your IX encourages visitors to transform their own campuses and communities. Know Your IX’s media awareness also extends to advice on how to harness the media for the movement, and advice on avoiding being misrepresented in the media.

Image courtesy Know Your IX.

Know Your IX is taking a new step toward empowering survivor-activists through educating students on their federal civil right to keep campuses free of sexual violence, and giving students tested strategies with which to implement change. Students are reaching out to other students, and building a resource that is well-researched, decidedly relevant, and in step with current trends in digital activism. But don’t just take my word for it. Learn to know your IX here.

Click here to view original article

Read More

Wait Until You Read How Republicans Just Wasted Everyone's Good Time

The public's approval rating of Congress hovers in the mid-teens, and it's not hard to see why, especially when the GOP-controlled House seems insistent on wasting time with ridiculous bills that are purely symbolic rather than effective. It's no secret that the House has tried to repeal Obamacare over 40 times, which is a travesty when there are so many issues in this country that aren't getting anywhere near the amount of time, effort, and resources they deserve, but the waste doesn't stop there.

Last Wednesday, the House discussed (and eventually shelved) a bill related to transportation and housing funding, which sounds perfectly legitimate. However, the bill also contained a provision to defund ACORN, the anti-poverty group.

If the last time you heard about ACORN seems like it was years ago, that's because the group is no longer in existence. After a vicious but false video by conservative James O'Keefe in 2009 suggested that ACORN provided advice on tax avoidance for prostitution and child smuggling, the group fell into infamy, regardless of the fact that several state attorney generals and the Governmental Accountability Office cleared them of all charges. Further funding bans by the GOP caused the group to officially disband in 2010.

And yet, in the past three years, the GOP has made not one, not two, but 13 separate attempts to shut down the defunct group.

That's 13 separate times that a completely unnecessary provision has been tacked onto a bill. Thirteen separate times that a useless addendum has taken up precious congressional minutes and dialogue. Thirteen times that other issues, like the persistence of educational inequality in America or the inability to pass a comprehensive federal budget or even a legitimate Republican alternative to the Affordable Care Act, have not been discussed.

It seems that the new tactic in the House is not to actually get things done by passing legislation (the rate of "congressional productivity" is actually at an all-time low) but to merely present symbolic legislation to indicate an ideological stance. Prove you're a "real" Republican by continuously proposing a repeal to Obamacare, no matter how many times it hasn't passed before or how ineffective it actually is. Keep those RINO charges at bay by proposing reduced funding for ACORN, a notion that everyone can get behind even though it means literally nothing.

This kind of governing, if it can even be called that, is just political posturing and rhetoric. Its only purpose is to bolster the ideological credentials of those proposing and supporting it, and what's worse, it creates absolutely no change. When political ideology, and not results or leadership, are billed as top priority, the people of America are the ones that lose.

Click here to view original article

Read More

Them's Fightin' Words: The Case For Bringing Back the Duel

It is time to bring back dueling. Really. Dueling has admittedly never been popular in America. Even the Founders had difficulty finding states where it was legal. And in America's most famous duel, a great New Yorker and the man on the $10 bill was killed with a bullet to the chest.

In fact, people today see dueling as a problem that has been overcome by the Conquering Empire of Light and Reason, rather than a solution to many of the problems that we face on a daily basis. But dueling has much to offer. For one thing, it would reintroduce honor to public grievances. The Legal-Industrial Complex has benefited in recent years from the millions of lawsuits that get filed by someone who was allergic to the salsa at the football party. In fact, the legal industry has expanded so much that many lawyers have given up on waiting for cases, and started looking for them.

Many grievances are legitimate, but legalizing dueling would help ensure that such issues are not taken lightly. It might also help schools that wanted to secure funding for marksmanship or fencing teams, now that they could claim that they were just preparing students for later life.

While legalizing dueling would solve many problems, it might create a few. Some people would become magnets for duels and the worst scoundrels would also be the best shots. Donald Trump and Alex Rodriguez would probably be fairly good duelers by now, unless either one had been killed long ago. Ambulance-chasing lawyers would go away, only to be replaced by hearse-leading seconds.

But the best argument in favor of dueling is not the practical ends that it would serve, but rather its consistency with liberal principles. Perhaps the government should be allowed to protect individuals from themselves in some circumstances — e.g. when they are insane and therefore divided against themselves, or when they are bound to certain self-destructive addictions. But the government has no right to protect two individuals of completely sound mind from resolving their conflict on their own, as long as the terms are agreed upon.

One of the things that so impressed the French traveler Alexis de Tocqueville about the American experiment was that Americans liked to govern at the local level, or according to the least common denominator. Americans resolved their problems through improvised civic associations which benefited from their immediate knowledge and incentive to do the job the right way. What, then, could be more true to the this experiment than resolving one's grievances with nothing other than oneself, one's adversary, and two friends to serve as cornermen?

Some would no doubt argue that these issues could be addressed through conflict-resolution professionals who could negotiate some kind of monetary settlement without the government. The problem is, whenever those in conflict do not play for keeps, no resolution will satisfy them as long as they believe they could have gotten more. The Winklevosses are walking proof of this. Once dueling is legalized, individuals will have two options for satisfaction. One is the state's justice, the other is the point of a sword and barrel of a gun. The first might be safer, but the second is much less prejudiced.

Click here to view original article

Read More

3 New Yorkers Who Are Asking Forgiveness — And Doing It Wrong

Public requests for forgiveness have been on parade lately, given the slew of sex scandals involving public officials (like Anthony Weiner, Eliot Spitzer, and Bob Filner) and performance-enhancing-drug (PED) scandals involving professional athletes (like Alex Rodriguez and a host of other recently suspended MLB players).

But as praiseworthy and important a concept as forgiveness is, there's always the danger that it's being applied in a self-serving manner.

Take a quick look at what forgiveness is supposed to be about. When one person harms another, we have a perpetrator and a victim. Forgiveness is the process by which the perpetrator fixes that harm. It involves admitting what they've done and apologizing for it as well as compensating for the damage and changing their behavior so they don't repeat the mistake in the future.

How this process of forgiveness applies to a given situation will vary, because there are lots of ways that people can harm and mistreat each other. If I break your window or scratch your arm, there's a dollar amount we can put on compensation, or an obvious place to put the bandage. But, when we betray one another's trust — by lying or cheating, as Weiner and A-Rod have done — the harm done is intangible. It's real, but it's not the sort of thing a check or a bandage is going to fix. Credibility and trust is very easy to break, but very hard to rebuild.

Now, Weiner and A-Rod et al. have made a show — often, a very big, public show — of asking for forgiveness. But even as they're seeking forgiveness, they insist on holding onto the public positions in which they misbehaved.

A-Rod, along with many other MLB players found to have used steroids, wants to keep playing Major League Baseball. Sure, he lied and fooled fans into thinking that his achievements were the result of skill and talent. But he doesn't think he should have to step down from being a major league player in order to remedy that harm. No, he seems to think that the appropriate place for him to earn forgiveness is on the ball field where he cheated.

Meanwhile, Weiner and Spitzer may have resigned from the House of Representatives and the New York governor's mansion, respectively, after their sex scandals came to light. But they still think that they deserve a place in public office, now running for mayor and comptroller (respectively) of New York City. It's not like they've done anything to earn our trust back — rather, they think that holding public office is the place for them to do that. And, of course, Filner doesn't think he needs to step down at all, as he apparently believes that San Diego City Hall is the best place for him to deal with sexual harassment allegations from his time in the House of Representatives.

I'm not saying that you should have to resign your position in order to earn forgiveness for mistakes you've made while holding that position. In marriages, for instance, spouses often make amends for mistakes they've made as spouses without getting divorced. The same goes for mistakes made between parents and children.

But even in those cases, there is something of a probationary period, or at least some sort of trial separation, right? And it's not like these guys don't have other forums available to them.

Weiner could, as a private citizen, speak out about the dangers of sexting and the importance of public officials answering questions honestly and immediately. Instead, he's running for mayor even as we find he's still hiding details about other illicit online encounters. He displays little shame for his brazen lies from 2011 (e.g., saying that the scandalous photos might be "the point of Al-Qaeda’s sword").

Spitzer could, as a private citizen, talk about the evils of prostitution and work to keep people from viewing it as their only economic option. And yet he's running for NYC comptroller, serving no time after breaking a law that he himself signed into effect, a law which others have done jail time for breaking. And he had to be prodded into admitting that his scandal involved lying about illegal activity, not "personal" affairs. "Politicians dissemble all the time" he says.

A-Rod could, as a former professional athlete, talk to kids and prospective athletes about the dangers of using steroids and PEDs, warning them about the risk to their health and their integrity. But instead he's trying to add to his impressive batting statistics, numbers that he accomplished with some unspecified amount of chemical assistance.

There are lots of paths to redemption, because there are usually many ways and forums for people to earn back our respect and undo (or outweigh) they harm they've done. It only takes some dedication and imagination to stumble on them.

It's disappointing that Weiner, Spitzer, A-Rod and others have chosen a path that involves them getting to do exactly what they want to do anyway.

Click here to view original article

Read More

French Farmers Protest EU By Destroying 100,000 Eggs a Day

Can you say scrambled eggs? In France, poultry farmers pummeled a tax office in Brittany with 100,000 eggs, protesting a fall in prices and increased animal welfare regulations imposed by the EU. The farmers are vowing to destroy 100,000 eggs every day for the rest of the week. The availability and surplus of eggs in France has caused the price to stay below the heightened production prices, which were caused by the EU restrictions. Farmers are calling for the government to regulate and reduce egg production so that prices can rise.

Yet there isn't need for regulation here. The profit margin has decreased as a result of regular market activity and primarily because of the EU restrictions, which the production output will eventually adjust to.

The EU animal welfare restrictions took effect in January 2012, requiring farmers to build bigger cages for their hens. According to the head of the egg section of the representative union in Brittany, the new rules have caused the price of production to rise to .95-euro cents per kilogram. The purchase price is only .75-euro cents.

The night before, poultry farmers had also traveled to a similar office in Côtes d'Armor, dumping another 100,000. This amount is equivalent to 5% of France's total daily egg production. Farmers said that this would only be a preliminary measure to combat the issue. If their demands were not met, they would take further steps to influence government officials.

Farmers say that they are being forced to destroy many of their own egg supply because of the product’s abundance. They have demanded that the government reduce the supply by 5% and set up specific locations where the excess eggs can be destroyed.

The French are known of their theatrical protests. Just two months ago, farmers lead thousands of cows and sheep through Paris to protest rising costs in rearing farm animals.

If these poultry farmers were able to massively increase their egg destruction, they could end up affecting the daily supply and subsequently drive up the price, but this is highly unlikely.

Eventually the market should adjust naturally to the changes in price and the animal welfare restrictions, achieving a new equilibrium.

Click here to view original article

Read More

Here's What Obama Had to Say on Jay Leno Last Night

There are numerous events playing out across the world that require President Barack Obama’s attention. Some of them, such as Russia’s decision to grant asylum to NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden, have implications for the president’s perceived influence and his stature on the world stage. While it is hard to imagine that Jay Leno asked many questions that had not been preapproved by the Obama administration, Leno compelled Obama to speak substantively on issues ranging from Snowden and his PRISM allegations, to Trayvon Martin, to the coming implementations of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Jay Leno is hardly the David Frost of late night, and President Obama didn't work up much of a sweat as he carefully and confidently reiterated Jay Carney-approved positions. However, Leno gave Obama the opportunity to speak credibly on a range of issues, and the president took it.

After a cringe-worthy opening monologue in which Leno made a disingenuously self-deprecating remark about experiencing unemployment (ouch, Conan), the first real question Leno asked Obama was about the recent closing of U.S. embassies across the Middle East and North Africa, ostensibly because of the threat of an Al-Qaeda attack. It was obvious that the question's subtext was the controversy surrounding the 2012 attacks on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, and Republicans' attempts to drum up a scandal.

Obama wasted no time in answering the question, emphasizing the need to take threats seriously, and cautioning that, “This radical, violent extremism is still out there, and we’ve got to stay on top of it. It’s also a reminder of how courageous our embassy personnel tend to be, because you can never have 100% security in some of these places.” Although Leno moved the discussion seamlessly to the NSA, it was Obama who first mentioned Snowden. Obama acknowledged that the American public should be skeptical about government programs that may encroach on personal privacy, but he lost me a bit when he said, rather perfunctorily, “There is no spying on Americans .… We don’t have a domestic spying program.” Really? We don’t? Sure, you can argue the semantics of whether the NSA's extensive collection of American citizens' communication data amounts to a “program,” but to bluntly assert that the United States government does not engage in domestic surveillance is simply ludicrous.

The president was noncommittal regarding Snowden himself, and Russia’s decision to offer the whistle-blower asylum. Obama gave no indication that the he would take extraordinary measures to secure Snowden and return him to the United States to stand trial. However, he did accuse Snowden of jeopardizing national security, and failing to work within the existing framework for voicing concerns, which was established by last year's Whistleblower Protection Enhancement ActHere's What Obama Had to Say on Jay Leno Last Night. However, there are more exclusions and exceptions to the bill's so-called whistle-blower protections than you can shake a stick at (see Section 105 in particular). Besides, the Obama administration has been notoriously ill disposed toward whistle-blowers in the past. Amazingly, Obama accused Russia of slipping into a Cold War mentality, and did so without sounding hostile or exasperated. He simply situated the decision to grant Snowden asylum within the complex historical dynamic between the United States and Russia, whose relationship is often imperfect, but remains incredibly important.

Obama hit his stride when the conversation turned to health care and the economy. He has some moderately encouraging facts on his side: the U.S. unemployment rate just fell to 7.4 percent, the lowest it’s been since 2008, and there has been significant improvement in U.S. housing markets.

Leno also gave Obama a boost by bringing up the country's failing infrastructure, including crumbling bridges and inadequate highways, asking “Would it be possible to have a modern [Works Progress Administration]?” The president immediately expressed a desire to create infrastructure-based construction and urban-renewal jobs, but suggested that congressional Republicans only seem to be interested in symbolically repealing Obamacare for the 40th time. Obama said, "I'm just going to keep on Republicans to join with us." I'm not going to hold my breath. The end of the fiscal year is rapidly approaching, and hardly any of the legislation required to actually run the government has passed. For instance, House Republican leaders recently jeopardized the success of a farm bill Here's What Obama Had to Say on Jay Leno Last Nightby attempting to cut $40 billion from the food stamp program, even though several agricultural programs were set to expire on September 30.

While the Tonight Show interview was not exactly hard-hitting, Jay Leno did a commendable job of asking questions that required substantive and serious answers from Obama. And while he may not be giving me the answers I’d like to hear on every subject, Obama is clearly interested in governing, which is more than I can say about many of his opponents.

Click here to view original article

Read More