Princess Leia in the original Star Wars movies from 1977, 1980, and 1983 did more for the cause of feminism than any of the woke sequels. Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy should invent her own franchise, instead of trying to ruin someone else’s.
https://twitter.com/DanielAlmanPGH/status/1743776540427497554
I support meritocracy, because I want police officers who are actually capable of putting handcuffs on a suspect. In this video from Chicago, four police officers, working together, repeatedly try, and repeatedly fail, to put handcuffs on one suspect. Eventually the suspect runs away.
https://twitter.com/CPD1617Scanner/status/1727678611933515858
The expert who was interviewed this for this article blames this problem on “system racism,” but the expert did not say who it was that was engaging in this kind of behavior
https://www.yahoo.com/news/black-women-twice-likely-cyber-183000128.html
Black Women Twice As Likely To Be Cyber-Flashed
By Charity Nelson
July 11, 2023
A new study has revealed that Black women are twice as likely to experience cyber-flashing than their white counterparts. Cyber-flashing is defined as the act of using digital means, usually messaging or social media apps, to send pornographic images of oneself to another without their consent. Cyber-flashing can have disastrous effects on the victim, causing them distress, making them feel unsafe and endangering their long-term well-being.
The latest study, into cyber-flashing titled, “The exposé on women’s and marginalized genders’ social media experiences,” builds on a 2022 study that revealed that more than a fifth of girls and women in the United Kingdom have been cyber-flashed in the year prior. This recent study however goes even deeper. It found that 50 percent of the Black women who were part of the 2,000 women surveyed about their cyber-flashing experiences said they had indeed been cyber-flashed. This is in comparison to 26 percent of white women who shared the same traumatic experience.
A Grim State
Olivia DeRamus is the founder of Communia, the new social media platform that commissioned the study. Communia is an app dedicated to women and marginalized genders as it “prioritises wellbeing and social health”.
DeRamus, while speaking to the results from the study said, “This report reflects how women of colour also face system racism digitally, hyper sexualisation, increased risk of abuse – as well as how little is being done to protect their wellbeing on platforms like Facebook, which we can see is rated significantly higher as an unsafe space for Black women than White women in this report.”
DeRamus continued, “It makes sense then that the need for a safe space online for marginalized genders feels even more urgent for Black women at 91 per cent versus the 80 per cent of white women.”
Experts have cited that thorough social education on the matter, rather than simply enacting criminalizing laws, will be the best way to curb the issue. In the United States, some states including, California, Texas, and Virginia have already pushed to criminalize cyber-flashing.
Palestinian workers prefer to work for Israeli employers
https://www.jns.org/report-palestinian-workers-prefer-to-work-for-israeli-employers/
Palestinian workers prefer to work for Israeli employers
Higher salaries, legal protections and lack of discrimination are among the reasons most Palestinians would prefer to work for Israeli firms.
February 16, 2020
The United Nations “blacklist” of businesses operating in Israeli settlements was lauded by the Palestinian leadership following its publication last week, but a recent report indicates that Palestinians actually prefer to work for Israelis rather than Palestinians.
Titled “Why Palestinians prefer to work for Israeli employers,” the report, by Israel-based media watchdog group Palestinian Media Watch, affirms that whenever Palestinian workers have the opportunity to work for Israeli employers, they are quick to leave their jobs with Palestinian employers. The report cites an article in the official Palestinian Authority daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida that praises the Israeli-employment sector.
According to senior PMW analyst Nan Jacques Zilberdik, who co-authored the report with PMW director Itamar Marcus, there are a number of reasons Palestinians prefer Israeli employers.
“First, the salary from Israeli employers is more than double that of the Palestinian sector, but that is not all. Palestinians working for Israelis are protected by the same laws as Israeli workers, including health benefits, sick leave, vacation time and other workers’ rights, whereas these protections are not granted by Palestinian employers. Also there is no gender or religious discrimination in the Israeli sector.”
Speaking on the official P.A. TV show “Workers Affairs,” Israeli-Arab labor lawyer Khaled Dukhi of the Israeli NGO Workers’ Hotline said Israeli labor law is “very good” because it does not differentiate between men and women, Israelis and Palestinians, Muslims and Jews. However, he explained, “Palestinian workers who work for Israelis still suffer because Palestinian middlemen ‘steal’ 50 percent, 60 percent and even 70 percent of their salaries, especially those of women.”
The higher Israeli salaries have been consistent for years, according to surveys published by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics.
The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, Labor Force Survey for the second quarter of 2018 showed that the average daily wage for wage employees in the West Bank was NIS 107.9 ($31.5) compared with NIS 62.6 (18.3) in Gaza Strip. The average daily wage for the wage employees in Israel and the Israeli settlements reached NIS 247.9 ($72.3) in the second quarter of 2018, compared with NIS 242.5 ($70.8) in the first quarter of 2018.
In the name of diversity, equity, and inclusion, a Connecticut bill would require fire departments to hire female firefighters who aren’t strong enough to do their job
By Daniel Alman (aka Dan from Squirrel Hill)
January 23, 2023
In the name of diversity, equity, and inclusion, a Connecticut bill would require fire departments to hire female firefighters who aren’t strong enough to do their job.
I’m against this proposal.
As always, I support 100% meritocracy.
For the record, I am male, and I am too weak to pass their strength test. Weaklings like me should not be firefighters. Any woman who is strong enough to pass the test deserves to be hired.
I support meritocracy because I want airplanes that don’t crash, bridges that don’t fall down, doctors who don’t kill their patients, and firefighters who fight fires and save lives.
https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/proposed-bill-could-alter-female-firefighter-test/2958127/
Proposed Bill Could Alter Female Firefighter Test
A proposed bill is stirring up debate on whether the physical test for female firefighters should be changed.
By Briceyda Landaverde
January 19, 2023
“In the fire service, everybody pulls their own weight,” firefighter Kori Kelly said.
Kori Kelly is a 13-year veteran career firefighter.
“I know I’m held to a standard and on top of that, I hold myself to a higher standard to make sure that I don’t slip,” Kelly said.
Kelly is concerned over newly proposed legislation that would lower the physical test requirements for women to become firefighters.
“It’s a huge safety liability, the whole point of having the national standard is having a bar that everyone has to reach,” Kelly said.
Currently, all candidates regardless of gender are required to wear a 50-pound vest during the test. It is supposed to mirror the experience of wearing heavy gear and an air tank while performing firefighter duties.
The risk, Kelly said, if someone does not have to meet these capabilities, will they still be able to save lives?
“I can’t change any of the weights of the civilians I have to rescue,” Kelly said.
Five democrats introduced the bill earlier this month. According to the language, the purpose is to allow for a more diverse class of candidates by offering an alternative to the 50-pound vest component.
“We know there are not enough women involved in the fire service and really the big barrier to get into the fire academy is the candidate physical ability test,” Hamden Mayor Lauren Garrett said.
Garrett is pushing for the bill to pass. In town, the fire department has been forced to turn women away because they didn’t pass the required test by a small margin.
“I’m looking at just taking a few pounds of the backpacks, the weighted vest so that we can get more women to pass the CPAT test and then not at all changing the standard with the Connecticut Fire Academy,” Garrett said.
The language did not address exactly what the alternative would be. The bill has been referred to the Committee on Public Safety and Security.
The Only Rape Where the Left Says Victim-Blaming Is Okay
The Only Rape Where the Left Says Victim-Blaming Is Okay
By Raymond Ibrahim
June 19, 2022
Swedish officials are warning Ukrainian women living in refugee centers not to dress in a way that might provoke men from “other cultures” — code for Muslim migrants, who, in Sweden, are mostly of the Somali variety — who reside in the same refugee center.
And how do these hapless Ukrainian refugees dress, to prompt such a warning? According to Gitana Bengtsson, who has been helping them, “they usually dressed like us, you and me. There is nothing strange about it. They did not look like prostitutes. If those women lived in the city, no one would tell them how to dress.” Even so, and now that summer is near, the site manager has advised them not to wear shorts or skirts that reveal their body parts.
There have, moreover, been several other reports of Muslim migrants attacking or making female Ukrainian refugees feel unsafe. In one instance, migrants broke into the hostels of Ukrainian women living with their children. “They said that Sweden was a safe country, but I have not seen that,” one of these women said later. Another woman said that, in Ukraine, they at least understood and knew how to respond to threats: “[w]hen there are bombs, I know at least that I can go down to the basement and hide there” — whereas now a migrant would-be rapist might be lurking there.
These Ukrainian women, unused to Muslims, apparently need to get with the times and embrace “multicultural” living. The fact is, Western nations that house large Muslim migrant populations have repeatedly implied that if rapes are on the rise in their nations — Sweden is now the rape capital of the West, thanks to its Muslim population — that is because women are not doing “their part.”
A few examples follow.
After a 20-year-old Austrian woman waiting at a bus stop in Vienna was attacked, beaten, and robbed by four Muslim men—including one who “started [by] putting his hands through my hair and made it clear that in his cultural background there were hardly any blonde women” — police responded by telling the victim to dye her hair:
“At first I was scared, but now I’m more angry than anything. After the attack they told me that women shouldn’t be alone on the streets after 8pm. And they also gave me other advice, telling me I should dye my hair dark and also not dress in such a provocative way. Indirectly that means I was partly to blame for what happened to me. That is a massive insult.”
In 2001, Unni Wikan, a female professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo, said:
“Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes,” because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. The professor’s conclusion was not that Muslim men living in the West needed to adjust to Western norms, but the exact opposite: “Norwegian women must realize that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.”
So much for the feminist claim that women are free to dress and behave as promiscuously and provocatively as they want — and woe to the man who dares cite this as justifying male sexual aggression. Apparently, this feminist refrain does not apply to Muslim men.
And who can forget when Muslim migrant mobs sexually assaulted as many as one thousand women on New Year’s Eve 2016 in Cologne, Germany? Then, the city’s mayor, Henriette Reker, called on the women — the victims, not their male abusers — to make changes: “women and young girls … should go out and have fun, but they need to be better prepared, especially with the Cologne carnival coming up. For this, we will publish online guidelines that these young women can read through to prepare themselves.”
In yet another instance, seven Muslim migrants raped a teenage German girl in a park, after drugging her at a disco in Freiburg. (She at least survived; in a similar case that occurred a week earlier in Italy, the drugged rape victim was left murdered.) Bernhard Rotzinger, the police chief of Freiburg, responded by saying, “We cannot offer citizens an all-risk insurance [against crime], but I can advise this: don’t make yourself vulnerable by using alcohol or drugs.”
“Advice” against alcohol, drugs, and reckless behavior would be much more welcome had it not been made under duress. As things stand, it is a cop-out. Or, as another report discussing the aforementioned rape in Freiburg puts it, “[t]he focus on prevention is a good thing, but also shows how German authorities and media barely hold the migrant crisis responsible for the disaster that is unfolding in Germany. Political correctness has caused officials to put the blame for the criminal acts on the women instead of Merkel’s guests.”
The greater irony of all these excuses is that, from the very start of Islam 14 centuries ago, European women — even completely continent nuns — have always been portrayed by Muslims as sexually promiscuous by nature, and how they dressed had nothing to do with it. This article discusses the historic roots of this phenomenon. Modern-day examples indicating that this motif is still alive and well follow:
A British woman was trafficked to Morocco, where she was prostituted and repeatedly raped by dozens of Muslim men. They “made me believe I was nothing more than a slut, a white whore,” she recollected. “They treated me like a leper, apart from when they wanted sex. I was less than human to them, I was rubbish.”
Another British girl was “passed around like a piece of meat” among Muslim men who abused and raped her between the ages of 12 and 14. Speaking recently as an adult, a court heard how she “was raped on a dirty mattress above a takeaway and forced to perform [fellatio] in a churchyard,” and how one of her abusers “urinated on her in an act of humiliation” afterward.
A Muslim man explained to another British woman why he was raping her: “you white women are good at it.”
A Muslim man called a 13-year-old virgin “a little white slag” — British slang for “loose, promiscuous woman” — before raping her.
In Germany, a group of Muslim migrants stalked a 25-year-old woman, hurled “filthy” insults at her, and taunted her for sex. They too explained their logic — “German girls are just there for sex” — before reaching into her blouse and groping her.
Another Muslim man who almost killed his 25-year-old German victim while raping her — and shouting “Allah!” — afterward inquired if she liked it.
In Australia, a Muslim cabbie groped and insulted his female passengers, including by saying, “All Australian women are sluts and deserve to be raped.”
In Austria, an “Arabic-looking man” approached a 27-year-old woman at a bus stop, pulled down his pants, and “all he could say was sex, sex, sex,” prompting the woman to scream and flee.
In short, the ancient Islamic motif concerning the alleged promiscuity of European women is alive and well — irrespective of the latter’s behavior or dress — and continues to drive the Muslim rape of Western women.
Yet, even in this, Islam can turn to those “progressive,” godless elements that dominate Western society for cover. For, just as “the left” has worked long and hard to portray Islamic intolerance, violence, and terrorism as the West’s fault — because of the Crusades, because of colonialism, because of cartoons, because of Israel, because of freedom of speech — it now adds and legitimizes Islam’s worldview concerning Western promiscuity to the list of reasons that “provoke” Muslims to attack.
Washington Post spirals out of control after a writer retweets a ‘reprehensible’ joke about women
https://www.theblaze.com/news/wapo-dave-weigel-sexist-joke
Washington Post spirals out of control after a writer retweets a ‘reprehensible’ joke about women
By Carlos Garcia
June 3, 2022
A spokesperson for the Washington Post issued an apology after a writer retweeted a sexist joke and other writers at the news outlet objected vocally on Twitter.
Dave Weigel retweeted a joke about women on Friday and immediately regretted it after he was criticized heavily for joking on Twitter.
Weigel deleted the tweet, but it was saved for posterity by random people on Twitter and other writers at the outlet, like Felicia Sonmez, who objected to the sexist message.
https://twitter.com/feliciasonmez/status/1532763318804439047
“Every girl is bi. You just have to figure out if it’s polar or sexual,” read the tweet.
“Fantastic to work at a news outlet where retweets like this are allowed!” replied Sonmez sarcastically.
“Or perhaps @daveweigel the correct diagnosis: they’re just not that into you,” responded Stephanie Ruhl, the MSNBC host.
Kristine Coratti Kelly, a Wapo spokesperson, quickly issued an apology for the offensive joke tweet.
“Editors have made clear to the staff that the tweet was reprehensible and demeaning language or actions like that will not be tolerated,” said Kelly.
Weigel also apologized.
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1532771139323211776
For some on the left, it wasn’t enough.
“You are still misogynistic trash. Can’t believe @washingtonpost still employs someone with such deep-seated sexist beliefs. Definitely clouds his ability to report unbiased facts,” responded liberal activist Amy Siskind.
According to a report by CNN’s Oliver Darcy, WaPo national editor Matea Gold addressed the controversy with the outlet’s employees on a channel on Slack.
“I just want to assure all of you that The Post is committed to maintaining a respectful workplace for everyone. We do not tolerate demeaning language or actions,” Gold wrote.
The whole bizarre episode was mocked and ridiculed by many on social media.
“Seriously? The Washington Post had to issue a statement about a retweet of a dumb joke? Nearly a dozen journalists in Mexico have been murdered since the start of the year and here we have people freaking out because Dave Weigel retweeted something. Goddamned babies,” said editor Jay Caruso.
Top female scientist canceled over 13-year-old ‘Michael Jackson’ Halloween costume
Top female scientist canceled over 13-year-old ‘Michael Jackson’ Halloween costume
By Jennifer Kabbany
March 7, 2022
‘UW Medicine is helping to ruin a woman who devoted her career to finding a cure for HIV’
Highly decorated virologist Julie Overbaugh has been forced out of a position of leadership at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and resigned her faculty affiliate position at the University of Washington School of Medicine due to accusations of racism and investigations involving her decision to wear a Michael Jackson costume to a Halloween party in 2009.
A picture of the 13-year-old incident, in which she is accused of wearing “blackface,” has prompted peers to accuse her of racism despite the fact that her research has focused on aiding Africans for the last three decades.
“Overbaugh has devoted her professional career to studying viral pathogens that cause HIV. But amid publishing papers, running her own research lab, and flying back and forth from Kenya, she has also pursued another professional passion: mentoring. Overbaugh is one of two recipients of this year’s Nature Award for Mentoring in Science, which is awarded to select scientists in one country or region each year,” a 2016 report in GeekWire reports.
Last year, Overbaugh was elected to National Academy of Sciences.
“I am really happy to see gender balance in this year’s elected members and hope this signals a future trend,” Overbaugh said at the time. “In my field, HIV, which is a very large field, there have only been a couple of women elected — hopefully, there will be more in the future.”
But Overbaugh’s accomplishments during an age in which female STEM recruitment and retainment is a social justice priority apparently could not outweigh the 2009 incident of emulating the King of Pop at a party that was reportedly themed after Jackson’s famous “Thriller” album.
Members of the Overbaugh lab apparently enjoy celebrating Halloween and have posted pictures of its themed parties every year. In past years they have dressed as emojis, bumble bees, fish — and even as “Binders of Babes” — a riff on Republican Mitt Romney’s gaffe while running for president.
The picture from the year 2009 is conspicuously missing from the webpage.
“The act depicted in the photo is racist, offensive and hurtful, and we offer our sincere apologies to anyone who has experienced pain or upset because of the act or this photo,” the cancer center announced in mid-February, adding Overbaugh was put on administrative leave and placed under investigation.
“Dr. Overbaugh has stepped down from her senior vice president role at Fred Hutch. She will continue working in her lab and will take a hiatus from her leadership duties in the Office of Education & Training. During this time, she will engage in an intensive education and reflection process.”
The Federalist reports:
Though the incident didn’t occur at UW Medicine, its CEO and equity officer also waded into the faux controversy. UW Medicine CEO Dr. Paul Ramsey and Chief Equity Officer Paula Houston notified UW Medicine staff in an email that Overbaugh was punished for engaging in the “racist, dehumanizing, and abhorrent act” of “blackface.” During a separate formal review process for UW faculty, the email confirmed, Overbaugh resigned from her UW affiliate faculty member appointment.
Overbaugh released a short statement to me. “I did not know the association of this with blackface at the time, in 2009, but understand the offense that is associated with this now,” she said. “I have apologized for this both publicly and privately and beyond that have no other comments.”
Ramsey and Houston claim that the UW Medicine community was “harmed” by the 13-year-old photo that most staff didn’t know existed until reading about it in the Feb. 25 email. “We acknowledge that our community has been harmed by this incident and the fact that 13 years elapsed before action was taken,” they wrote. “We are convening a series of affinity group meetings in the next few weeks to provide spaces for mutual support, reflection, and response.”
Neither Ramsey nor Houston explained how the photo “harmed” anyone. Indeed, beyond one confirmed complaint, it’s unclear if anyone even cared about the old photo.
The full memo from UW Medicine was republished by journalist Jesse Singal on his Twitter page. The memo notes that Overbaugh resigned her post at the university once administrators began their own probe into the incident.
Her faculty bio is no longer on the UW School of Medicine website, although its Department of Global Health has, as of Monday afternoon, yet to strip her from its webpage.
“A U. Washington doctor who has dedicated her career to fighting HIV in Africa, including research w/sex workers, is having her reputation and career incinerated because she dressed up as Michael Jackson, in blackface, once in 2009,” Singal noted.
https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1497289911996760064
“Just to situate everyone, the event in question happened several years before the most recent instance of 30 Rock airing blackface-oriented comedy to tens of millions of people. What she did was a bad idea but at the time was obviously not seen as too risque even for network TV,” he added.
Writing for The Federalist, Jason Rantz points out that “UW Medicine is lashing out against Overbaugh to show its wokeness and earn social currency.”
“That UW Medicine is helping to ruin a woman who devoted her career to finding a cure for HIV is immaterial to its leaders. To progressive activists, highlighting one’s virtues is more important than curing a deadly disease.”
Belgian surgeon sentenced to ten months in prison over sexist speech
Belgian surgeon sentenced to ten months in prison over sexist speech
Cosmetic surgeon Jeff Hoeyberghs insisted he was only speaking ‘the truth’ when he called women ‘hysterical, lazy, weak, stupid’
By Justin Stares
January 4, 2022
A cosmetic surgeon from Belgium has been handed a ten-month prison sentence for a lecture in which he complained that women were no longer willing to give sexual favours in exchange for protection and money from men.
Judges in Flanders said the speech by Jeff Hoeyberghs, 60, merited the prison sentence, half of which is suspended, on the grounds that he not only intended to incite discrimination, hatred and violence against women but also refused to apologise.
Hoeyberghs insisted he was only speaking the “truth”, while some politicians claimed his freedom of speech was being curtailed.
In his 2019 speech at Ghent University, Hoeyberghs called women “hysterical, lazy, weak, stupid” and “dirty creatures, who seek money and protection from men to whom they owe sex”.
Women served “to satisfy men sexually and perform household chores”, he said, but “don’t want to open their legs anymore”.
Women could be compared to “animals” with “udders”, the surgeon told his postgraduate audience.
Specific women, including students in the auditorium, a TV broadcaster, and green activist Greta Thunberg, were targeted with insults.
Women were “worthless” in the role of doctors, judges, teachers, scientists, journalists, and business executives, Hoeyberghs said.
‘Stupid and outrageous’
Hoeyberghs, who qualified as a cosmetic surgeon in the UK and is a frequent TV commentator in Belgium, was invited to speak by the university.
The speech, which was filmed by students and broadcast live on Facebook, resulted in more than 1,500 complaints.
In court, Hoeyberghs’ lawyer said none of those personally targeted had sued for defamation.
The accusations, the surgeon claimed, were evidence of a “well-oiled international machine of communist signature and with Western state subversion as the ultimate goal”.
Judges dismissed his arguments, ruling that Hoeyberghs’ “criminal behaviour threatens a peaceful society where there is room for all people, regardless of their gender.
“It creates a hostile atmosphere in society and contributes to even more strife, discord, conflict and violence”.
But Bart De Wever, mayor of Antwerp and leader of the nationalist New Flemish Alliance Party, said: “Hoeyberghs’ statements were stupid and outrageous. But reprehensible is different from punishable. Freedom cannot be protected by restricting it”.
Hoeyberghs has said he will appeal.
House panel backs requiring women to register for the draft
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/01/women-register-military-draft-house-panel-508781
House panel backs requiring women to register for the draft
The House Armed Services Committee vote follows a similar vote in the Senate to expand the Selective Service System to include women.
By Connor O’Brien
September 1, 2021
The House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday voted to require women to register for the military draft, making the change one step closer to becoming law after senators endorsed the move this summer.
During late night deliberations on the committee’s annual defense policy bill, lawmakers voted 35-24 to adopt an amendment from Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) to expand registration for the Selective Service System beyond men.
The move caps off a contentious debate and could stir up conservative opposition to the National Defense Authorization Act, which authorizes defense spending and lays out military policy.
Several Republicans broke ranks to help Democrats to adopt the amendment.
Calls to broaden the pool for a potential draft to all Americans, not just men, have grown as the Pentagon opened all military combat roles to women in 2015. Advocates of the change also contend the current system is discriminatory.
“It’s past time,” said Houlahan, an Air Force veteran. “Women make up over 50 percent of our population, and not including them in the Selective Service is not only a disservice to these women, but also to our nation as a whole.”
If the provision remains in the defense bill and passes on the House floor, the change has a high chance of becoming law. The Senate Armed Services Committee adopted a similar provision in its defense bill, which awaits a floor vote.
Current law requires that American men register for the Selective Service when they turn 18, though there hasn’t been a military draft in more than four decades. The law, however, remains on the books should the U.S. need to conscript men into the service in a time of war.
One Republican supporter, Rep. Michael Waltz of Florida, a former Army Green Beret, warned that the military would need a much broader pool of recruits in the event of “a national emergency so grave” that it requires a draft.
“If it’s so grave that we have to go to a draft, we need everybody,” Waltz said. “We need man, woman, gay, straight, any religion, Black, white, brown. We need everybody, all hands on deck.”
Despite bipartisan support, conservative lawmakers and advocacy groups have nonetheless assailed efforts to expand the draft to include women.
“We don’t need to draft women in order for women to have equality in this nation,” said Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.). “Women are of worth and of value right now and we are equal with men without having to pass a new law that would require 50 percent of this country — our daughters and our sisters and our wives — to have to be drafted.”
The Senate Armed Services Committee in July approved in a bipartisan vote a similar expansion of the draft. The change, offered by Armed Services Chair Jack Reed (D-R.I.), fired up conservative senators, though the bill still passed out of the committee with a wide bipartisan vote.
The full Senate is slated to debate the defense bill this fall.
An independent commission tasked by Congress with examining military and public service recommended requiring women to register for Selective Service last year, among other changes.
Several lawsuits have challenged the current law, alleging it’s discriminatory and unconstitutional. The Supreme Court declined to hear a suit brought by the National Coalition for Men challenging the male-only draft in June.
The left wing Women’s March has just scored a major victory. As we all know, its founder, Linda Sarsour, wants the U.S. to adopt Sharia law. Well, a Texas judge just ruled that a woman getting a divorce must go by Sharia law, where a woman’s testimony counts only half has much as a man’s. I hope the left is happy.
By Daniel Alman (aka Dan from Squirrel Hill)
July 8, 2021
Linda Sarsour, who was born in Brooklyn, New York, made four tweets in favor of the U.S. adopting Sharia law.
Sarsour made this tweet, which says the following:
“10 weeks of PAID maternity leave in Saudi Arabia. Yes PAID. And ur worrying about women driving. Puts us to shame.”
She also made this tweet, which says:
“shariah law is reasonable and once u read into the details it makes a lot of sense. People just know the basics”
and this tweet, which says:
“You’ll know when you’re living under Sharia Law if suddenly all your loans & credit cards become interest free. Sound nice, doesn’t it?”
and this tweet, which says:
“If you are still paying interest than Sharia Law hasn’t taken over America.”
These statements prove that Sarsour wants the U.S. to adopt Sharia law.
Sharia law bans women from driving cars, prohibits women from appearing alone in public, calls for girls to have their genitals mutilated, and gives a woman’s testimony in court only half the value of a man’s.
After Sarsour made those four tweets in favor of the U.S. adopting Sharia law, left wing American feminists chose her to be one of the organizers of the 2017 Women’s March.
Now in 2021, a Texas judge has ruled that a woman getting a divorce must go by Sharia law, where a woman’s testimony counts only half has much as a man’s. I hope the left is happy.
https://news.yahoo.com/texas-judge-denies-woman-divorce-185600526.html
Texas judge denies woman divorce proceedings in favor of Sharia tribunal
By Nicholas Rowan
July 8, 2021
A Texas judge earlier this year ordered that a Muslim woman seeking a divorce appear before a tribunal governed by Sharia, a move that her lawyers said was unconstitutional.
In March, Collin County District Judge Andrea Thompson ordered that Mariam Ayad, a woman attempting to divorce her husband, Ayad Hashim Latif, forgo the usual legal paths and instead submit to arbitration under a Fiqh panel, governed by a traditional Muslim group based in Saudi Arabia. Thompson’s reasoning rested on a prenuptial agreement between the two in which Ayad agreed to allow her marriage to be arbitrated according to Sharia.
Ayad said that when she signed the document, she did not realize that she was submitting to Sharia, according to court documents. Instead, she said she thought she was signing two copies of a marriage acknowledgment form. Under Sharia, a woman’s testimony in divorce proceedings is worth half of a man’s, making her plea to be removed from that agreement especially urgent, her attorneys wrote.
Ayad argued that she should be released from the agreement because she did not sign it voluntarily and because the agreement itself violates the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. Under the agreement, her husband has the sole right to seek or deny a divorce and Ayad “will not have a meaningful right to be heard,” her attorneys wrote.
Thompson, however, ruled in March that the agreement was binding. A revised order in June reaffirmed that decision, but it removed explicit references to the Fiqh panel, according to court documents. Under the order, Ayad’s divorce case falls under the jurisdiction of the Islamic Association of North Texas, one of the largest Muslim groups in the state.
Thompson did not respond to a request for comment.
Ayad’s attorneys took the case to a Texas appeals court, arguing that the Sharia proceedings are in direct conflict with United States divorce law. The agreement itself, they added, is “unconscionable” and in opposition to Texas law as well.
An American woman named Bethany Vierra got a masters degree in Middle Eastern studies and a PhD in human rights, moved to Saudi Arabia, was shocked to discover that women didn’t have the same rights as men, and falsely claimed, “The problem here is not Islamic law”
Bethany Vierra was born in Washington state.
She got a master’s degree in Middle Eastern studies from the American University in Paris.
Then she got a PhD in human rights at the National University of Ireland.
With such an education, I would think that Vierra would be aware that women in Saudi Arabia didn’t have the same rights as men, and that this lack of equal rights was due to the country following Islamic law.
But I would be wrong.
Vierra moved to Saudi Arabia, married a Saudi Arabian man, and later gave birth – while in Saudi Arabia – to their daughter.
Since doing those things, Vierra and her husband have gotten a divorce, and are now involved in a custody dispute over their daughter.
During this custody dispute, Vierra was genuinely shocked to find out that under Islamic law (also known as Sharia law) in Saudi Arabia, women do not have the same rights as men. Here’s the obligatory “shocked” scene from the movie Casablanca:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME
Vierra was also surprised to find out that she was not allowed to leave Saudi Arabia or to access her own bank account, without her ex-husband’s permission.
During the custody dispute, some of the evidence that was used against Vierra were photographs which showed that she had worn a bikini in public, had worn yoga pants in public, and had had her hair uncovered in public.
And Vierra said of this:
“The problem here is not Islamic law.”
Relative to their level of education, I don’t think I’ve ever heard of anyone as dumb as Bethany Vierra.
Instead of getting all of those useless college degrees, she should have watched the movie Not Without My Daughter. The movie is based on a true story. Here’s the trailer for it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TSmbayUJCo
And here’s a scene from it about how the country enforces its dress code:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm3xv5sosng
Meanwhile, back in the U.S., a woman named Linda Sarsour, who was born in Brooklyn, New York, made four tweets in favor of the U.S. adopting Sharia law.
Sarsour made this tweet, which says the following:
“10 weeks of PAID maternity leave in Saudi Arabia. Yes PAID. And ur worrying about women driving. Puts us to shame.”
She also made this tweet, which says:
“shariah law is reasonable and once u read into the details it makes a lot of sense. People just know the basics”
and this tweet, which says:
“You’ll know when you’re living under Sharia Law if suddenly all your loans & credit cards become interest free. Sound nice, doesn’t it?”
and this tweet, which says:
“If you are still paying interest than Sharia Law hasn’t taken over America.”
These statements prove that Sarsour wants the U.S. to adopt Sharia law.
Sharia law bans women from driving cars, prohibits women from appearing alone in public, calls for girls to have their genitals mutilated, and gives a woman’s testimony in court only half the value of a man’s.
After Sarsour made those four tweets in favor of the U.S. adopting Sharia law, left wing American feminists chose her to be one of the organizers of the 2017 Women’s March.
But any movement which truly cared about women’s rights would not support someone who wants the U.S. to treat women in such a horrible and repulsive manner.
I will say one positive thing about Sarsour: even though Sarsour claims to believe in Sharia law, and says that women in Saudi Arabia are better off than women in the U.S., at least she is not dumb enough to actually move to Saudi Arabia.
In order for the women’s soccer team to be paid as much as the men’s team, at least one of these two things should have to happen
In order for the women’s soccer team to be paid as much as the men’s team, at least one of these two things should have to happen:
1) The women’s games generate as much advertising revenue as the men’s games.
2) The women’s team plays 25 games against the men’s team, and the women’s team wins at least 40% of those games.
Poll: Which one of these two Gillette ads do you like better?
Here are two ads from Gillette.
Which one do you like better?
Here’s the first ad:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koPmuEyP3a0
And here’s the second ad:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez falsely accused one of her critics of being sexist because she can’t handle legitimate criticism
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez originally claimed on her campaign website that she grew up in the Bronx, and that she had a long commute every day to get to a better school in the suburbs.
Several people responded by saying that she only lived in the Bronx until she was five years old, and that she later lived in a middle class suburb, and that she did not have the long daily commute to school that she had claimed.
One of her critics wrote the following:
Right, but @Ocasio2018 didn’t grow up in a city. She grew up in a small, homogenous, affluent suburb, where she attended excellent schools before pretending she grew up in the Bronx.
In my opinion, it would have been best for Oxasio-Cortez to have done one of the two following things:
Either
1) Defend her original claim.
Or
2) Admit that her critics were telling the truth.
However, instead of doing one of those two things, Ocasio-Cortez falsely accused one of her critics of being sexist, when she wrote the following (the bolding is mine):
In which a Republican literally tries to mansplaining *my own childhood* and life to me.
And in true mansplaining form, he’s doing it wrong with an great degree of confidence.
It begs the question: is the GOP really “sending us their best?”
By accusing her critic of “mansplaining,” Ocasio-Cortez is falsely accusing him of being sexist.
In reality, there is nothing sexist in his criticism of her.
Ocasio-Cortez views herself as being a victim of imaginary sexism that does not actually exist.
Also, the fact that she changed her campaign website in response to the criticism suggests – very strongly – that her critics were correct. It appears that she did indeed lie about her upbringing.
I don’t care where Ocasio-Cortez grew up.
But I do care if she lied about it.
And more importantly, I care that she is so horrible at debating that she feels the need to falsely accuse her critic of being sexist.
California Women’s March cancels upcoming event for being “overwhelmingly white”
The California chapter of the Women’s March has canceled an event that had been scheduled for next month, because it would have been “overwhelmingly white.”
The group’s official statement on the cancellation says (the bolding is mine):
“The local organizers are continuing to meet and discuss how to broaden representation in the organizing committee to create an event that represents and supports peoples who live here in Humboldt. Up to this point, the participants have been overwhelmingly white, lacking representation from several perspectives in our community… Instead of pushing forward with crucial voices absent, the organizing team will take time for more outreach. Our goal is that planning will continue and we will be successful in creating an event that will build power and community engagement through connection between women that seek to improve the lives of all in our community.”
The way that Planned Parenthood treats its pregnant employees is cruel, illegal, and extremely hypocritical
The New York Times just published this article, which is titled, “Planned Parenthood Is Accused of Mistreating Pregnant Employees.”
The article cites numerous examples of how Planned Parenthood has given absolutely horrible treatment to its pregnant employees.
Not only are these actions on the part of Planned Parenthood cruel, some of them are also illegal, and all of them are extremely hypocritical.
If there’s any one organization that should treat its pregnant employees with kindness and respect, as well as obeying the laws regarding pregnant employees, it’s Planned Parenthood.
Here are some excerpts from the article, along with my own comments:
Ms. Hairston told the human-resources department for Planned Parenthood’s clinic in White Plains, N.Y., that her high blood pressure was threatening her pregnancy. She sent the department multiple notes from her nurse recommending that she take frequent breaks.
Managers ignored the notes. They rarely gave her time to rest or to take a lunch break, Ms. Hairston said.
“I had to hold back tears talking to pregnant women, telling them to take care of their pregnancies when I couldn’t take care of mine,” she said. “It made me jealous.”
That is just downright plain mean.
Planned Parenthood… has been accused of sidelining, ousting or otherwise handicapping pregnant employees, according to interviews with more than a dozen current and former employees.
In interviews and legal documents, women at Planned Parenthood… described discrimination that violated federal or state laws — managers considering pregnancy in hiring decisions, for example, or denying rest breaks recommended by a doctor.
These are the exact same kinds of illegal treatment of employees that left wing feminists have always claimed to be against. The fact that Planned Parenthood did this to its own pregnant employees is inexcusable, illegal, and terribly hypocritical.
… at Planned Parenthood, the country’s leading provider of reproductive services, managers in some locations declined to hire pregnant job candidates, refused requests by expecting mothers to take breaks and in some cases pushed them out of their jobs after they gave birth, according to current and former employees in California, Texas, North Carolina and New York.
Most Planned Parenthood offices do not provide paid maternity leave
How many zillions of times have left wing feminists said they were in favor of paid maternity leave? And can anyone name an organization that is more left wing feminist than Planned Parenthood? I dare say that these pregnant employees would have been treated far better if they had been working at one of the conservative, right wing, for-profit corporations that left wing feminists are always accusing of being “sexist” and “misogynist.”
A dozen lawsuits filed against Planned Parenthood clinics in federal and state courts since 2013 accused managers of denying workers rest periods, lunch breaks or overtime pay, or retaliating against them for taking medical leave.
Managers have discriminated against pregnant women and new mothers, according to interviews with the current and former Planned Parenthood employees and with organizers from the Office and Professional Employees International Union, which represents some Planned Parenthood workers.
In Miami, one current and two former employees said that women at a Planned Parenthood office were scared to tell managers they were pregnant. One of them said that, in conversations with supervisors, colleagues would often volunteer that they were not planning on having children or were gay or single.
“It was looked down upon for you to get pregnant,” said Carolina Delgado, who worked in the Miami office until 2012. “I don’t think that any supervisor had to literally say it for us to feel it.”
Apparently, Planned Parenthood would rather spend money fighting lawsuits than treat its pregnant employees with respect. Absolutely disgusting.
A former hiring manager at a Planned Parenthood in California said that when internal promotions came up, supervisors openly debated whether candidates were likely to get pregnant in the near future and preferred those who were not. They declined to hire one pregnant woman and to promote one new mother, the employee said. (Under the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, it is illegal to consider whether a job candidate is or will become pregnant.)
The former manager said her colleagues felt they couldn’t afford to promote someone only to lose them for several weeks.
Completely despicable. It was left wing feminists who fought so hard to pass the Pregnancy Discrimination Act in the first place. How dare they violate the very same law that they expect everyone else to obey.
49 of Planned Parenthood’s 55 regional offices — which each manage a set of local clinics — do not provide paid maternity leave
89% of Planned Parenthood’s regional offices do not give paid maternity leave to their employees. So why do they even call themselves “Planned Parenthood” in the first place?
Tracy Webber, the former director of clinical services in White Plains, sued the organization for pregnancy discrimination in 2009, saying she had been fired four weeks after giving birth. Planned Parenthood settled for undisclosed terms.
Planned Parenthood fired an employee because she became a parent? That’s mean, and it’s illegal, and especially, it’s the height of hypocrisy.
A woman who worked at Planned Parenthood’s New Rochelle, N.Y., clinic and who declined to be named said in an interview that, when she got pregnant last year, managers ignored her doctor’s note recommending frequent breaks. Her manager asked her to delay her maternity leave and, after she gave birth, pressed her to return early.
The fact that Planned Parenthood ignored a doctor’s note from one of its own pregnant employees makes me wonder about the quality of the medical care and advice that Planned Parenthood gives to its own clients.
A medical assistant at the same clinic was fired in May 2018, the day she returned from maternity leave, according to a former human resources manager who oversaw the clinic. Jonas Urba, the woman’s lawyer, said she reached a confidential resolution with Planned Parenthood.
Once again, Planned Parenthood fired one of its employees because she became a parent. This kind of behavior by Planned Parenthood is extraordinarily hypocritical.
When Ms. Hairston asked for regular breaks, including 30 minutes for lunch, her supervisors brushed her off. Ms. Hairston said she sent multiple notes from her nurse at Full Circle Women’s Health to the regional office’s human resources department, stating that the extra breaks were medically necessary. No one responded, and nothing changed, according to Ms. Hairston and the former human resources manager.
Ms. Hairston’s hands and feet swelled; the clinic’s plastic gloves no longer fit. Her blood pressure got so high that her doctor put her on bed rest when she was seven months pregnant.
She returned to work on strict orders to not work more than six hours a day and to take regular breaks. One day in March, she worked a much longer shift. She soon became so sick that her doctor told her to go back on bed rest. A few days later, on March 23, she went to the hospital. Doctors performed an emergency C-section. She was 34 weeks pregnant.
When she had been on maternity leave for eight of the 12 weeks guaranteed by the Family and Medical Leave Act, Planned Parenthood’s human resources department called her multiple times and urged her to return to work early, Ms. Hairston said. She emailed the department and said she felt “discriminated against.” She resigned in June.
So this is how Planned Parenthood treats pregnant women. This is astoundingly horrendous. Shame on Planned Parenthood for treating women the exact opposite of the way Planned Parenthood tries to depict itself in its publicity material.
So, there you have it. Planned Parenthood is mean to its pregnant employees, it breaks the very laws that it claims to support, and it apparently has no interest in helping its female employees who “plan” to become “parents,” despite that being the organization’s very name.
New York Times: Planned Parenthood Is Accused of Mistreating Pregnant Employees
Not only are these actions on the part of Planned Parenthood cruel, some of them are also illegal, and all of them are extremely hypocritical.
If there’s any one organization that should treat pregnant employees with kindness and respect, as well as obeying the laws regarding pregnant employees, it’s Planned Parenthood.
Planned Parenthood Is Accused of Mistreating Pregnant Employees
Employers that champion women face accusations of discriminating against their pregnant workers, showing how widespread the problem is in American workplaces.
December 20, 2018
As a medical assistant at Planned Parenthood, Ta’Lisa Hairston urged pregnant women to take rest breaks at work, stay hydrated and, please, eat regular meals.
Then she got pregnant and couldn’t follow her own advice.
Last winter, Ms. Hairston told the human-resources department for Planned Parenthood’s clinic in White Plains, N.Y., that her high blood pressure was threatening her pregnancy. She sent the department multiple notes from her nurse recommending that she take frequent breaks.
Managers ignored the notes. They rarely gave her time to rest or to take a lunch break, Ms. Hairston said.
“I had to hold back tears talking to pregnant women, telling them to take care of their pregnancies when I couldn’t take care of mine,” she said. “It made me jealous.”
Discrimination against pregnant women and new mothers remains widespread in the American workplace. It is so pervasive that even organizations that define themselves as champions of women are struggling with the problem.
That includes Planned Parenthood, which has been accused of sidelining, ousting or otherwise handicapping pregnant employees, according to interviews with more than a dozen current and former employees.
In interviews and legal documents, women at Planned Parenthood and other organizations with a feminist bent described discrimination that violated federal or state laws — managers considering pregnancy in hiring decisions, for example, or denying rest breaks recommended by a doctor.
In other cases, the bias was more subtle. Many women said they were afraid to announce a pregnancy at work, sensing they would be seen as abandoning their colleagues.
Some of those employers saw accommodating expecting mothers as expensive and inconvenient. Others were unsympathetic to workers seeking special treatment.
At Natera, which sells genetic tests for pregnant women, two former employees, Melissa Blain Johnson and Judit Rigo, said they were demoted while on maternity leave. Ms. Johnson, who has sued Natera, also said that she was left feeling like a “guinea pig” when her boss suggested that she and another pregnant employee pose as patients and get genetically tested by a rival company.
“Ms. Johnson’s employment at Natera was not influenced inappropriately by her pregnancy or subsequent maternity leave,” said Anna Czene, a Natera spokeswoman. “The same was true for Ms. Rigo.”
At Avon, which calls itself “the company for women,” two employees in a cosmetics-testing lab have sued for being forced to handle toxic chemicals while pregnant. A marketing executive, Caroline Ruiz, also said she was fired four days after announcing her pregnancy.
Paige Cali, a spokeswoman for Avon, said the company “strongly denies claims of discrimination.”
At Mehri & Skalet, a progressive law firm suing Walmart for pregnancy discrimination, three lawyers have accused a founding partner, Cyrus Mehri, of mistreatment. Heidi Burakiewicz said Mr. Mehri pressured her to return early from maternity leave. Sandi Farrell was told to participate in a performance review during her leave, and when she asked to postpone it she was fired. Taryn Wilgus Null said Mr. Mehri questioned her child care arrangements in a performance review after she returned from leave.
Mr. Mehri said he strongly denied the accusations and that no one was mistreated after giving birth. He said that Ms. Burakiewicz’s allegation “is a lie, plain and simple,” that Ms. Farrell had performance problems and that Ms. Null, now a lawyer at the Justice Department, misinterpreted his comments.
And at Planned Parenthood, the country’s leading provider of reproductive services, managers in some locations declined to hire pregnant job candidates, refused requests by expecting mothers to take breaks and in some cases pushed them out of their jobs after they gave birth, according to current and former employees in California, Texas, North Carolina and New York.
Most Planned Parenthood offices do not provide paid maternity leave, though many let new mothers take partially paid disability leave.
“I believe we must do better than we are now,” Leana Wen, the president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a statement. “It’s our obligation to do better, for our staff, for their families and for our patients.”
Ms. Wen said the organization was investigating the allegations of pregnancy discrimination reported by The New York Times. The organization also is conducting a review to determine the cost of providing paid maternity leave to nearly 12,000 employees nationwide.
Vincent Russell, the regional chief executive who oversees the office where Ms. Hairston worked, denied her accusations.
While Planned Parenthood’s clinics and regional offices brought in about $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2016 — half from private donations and half from the government, to reimburse treatment provided to Medicaid patients — conservative lawmakers routinely threaten to kill its taxpayer funding. With their finances precarious, the clinics pay modest salaries to the employees who provide health care — abortions, cancer screenings, prenatal care, disease testing — to 2.4 million mostly low-income patients every year.
The Planned Parenthood Federation of America has its headquarters in Manhattan. The clinics that serve women are run by 55 regional affiliates with their own chief executives and human resources policies. They receive some money and support from headquarters.
Tight budgets sometimes created punishing workplace conditions, employees said. A dozen lawsuits filed against Planned Parenthood clinics in federal and state courts since 2013 accused managers of denying workers rest periods, lunch breaks or overtime pay, or retaliating against them for taking medical leave.
Managers have discriminated against pregnant women and new mothers, according to interviews with the current and former Planned Parenthood employees and with organizers from the Office and Professional Employees International Union, which represents some Planned Parenthood workers.
In Miami, one current and two former employees said that women at a Planned Parenthood office were scared to tell managers they were pregnant. One of them said that, in conversations with supervisors, colleagues would often volunteer that they were not planning on having children or were gay or single.
“It was looked down upon for you to get pregnant,” said Carolina Delgado, who worked in the Miami office until 2012. “I don’t think that any supervisor had to literally say it for us to feel it.”
Dannette Hill, Planned Parenthood’s head of human resources, said that most parents who work in the Miami office have been promoted after returning from leave.
A former hiring manager at a Planned Parenthood in California said that when internal promotions came up, supervisors openly debated whether candidates were likely to get pregnant in the near future and preferred those who were not. They declined to hire one pregnant woman and to promote one new mother, the employee said. (Under the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, it is illegal to consider whether a job candidate is or will become pregnant.)
The former manager said her colleagues felt they couldn’t afford to promote someone only to lose them for several weeks.
Financial pressures also explain why 49 of Planned Parenthood’s 55 regional offices — which each manage a set of local clinics — do not provide paid maternity leave. Employees in about 20 of those regions can use short-term disability to earn a portion of their salaries while on leave. The New York headquarters provides six weeks of paid parental leave.
Last year, Christine Charbonneau, who runs the regional office in Seattle, asked her human resources department to find out how much it would cost to cover maternity leave for the region. The estimate: $2 million a year. That is the entire annual budget of some clinics.
Ms. Charbonneau’s office, which oversees 27 clinics in the Northwest, generates $77 million a year in revenue. But states like Washington and Idaho have cut government funding in recent years. Paying for maternity leave, Ms. Charbonneau said, could force her to close clinics.
“It is easy to accuse someone of hypocrisy if you’re not the one trying to find $2 million out of thin air,” she said. “You try to be the Planned Parenthood that donors expect, and yet it is unattainable.”
Planned Parenthood’s policies, though, can make it hard for employees to scrape by after giving birth.
In August, Marissa Hamilton, an employee at Planned Parenthood in Colorado, gave birth to a baby boy. He was eight weeks premature, weighed less than four pounds and spent weeks in neonatal intensive care. The office doesn’t provide paid maternity leave.
In September, she started a fund-raiser on GoFundMe. On the appeals page, Ms. Hamilton wrote that she was under financial strain because “On top of medical bills I cannot work.” She set the goal at $15,000. So far she has raised $1,995.
Multiple Planned Parenthood executives said in interviews that they were eager for The Times to publish an article about the lack of paid maternity leave because they hoped it would lead to changes in the organization’s policies.
Ms. Hairston, the former medical assistant, took the job in 2015 because she believed in the group’s mission. “Planned Parenthood helped me give women a voice to do what they wanted with their bodies,” she said.
Ms. Hairston, 27, counseled women who wanted abortions and checked up on those carrying to term. She said she rarely took lunch and often spent 10-hour shifts on her feet.
She figured that there would be no better place to work while pregnant than a clinic that dealt with expecting mothers every day.
But Planned Parenthood’s Westchester County clinics, overseen by a regional office in Hawthorne, N.Y., had a history of issues with pregnant employees.
Tracy Webber, the former director of clinical services in White Plains, sued the organization for pregnancy discrimination in 2009, saying she had been fired four weeks after giving birth. Planned Parenthood settled for undisclosed terms.
A woman who worked at Planned Parenthood’s New Rochelle, N.Y., clinic and who declined to be named said in an interview that, when she got pregnant last year, managers ignored her doctor’s note recommending frequent breaks. Her manager asked her to delay her maternity leave and, after she gave birth, pressed her to return early.
A medical assistant at the same clinic was fired in May 2018, the day she returned from maternity leave, according to a former human resources manager who oversaw the clinic. Jonas Urba, the woman’s lawyer, said she reached a confidential resolution with Planned Parenthood.
The former human resources manager, who requested anonymity, said that executives assumed that when a pregnant worker brought in a doctor’s note, it was an excuse to work less. People who took sick days were perceived as lacking commitment.
“All the individuals identified in the article were treated fairly and equitably, free of any discrimination,” said Mr. Russell, the head of Planned Parenthood’s Hawthorne office.
When Ms. Hairston asked for regular breaks, including 30 minutes for lunch, her supervisors brushed her off. Ms. Hairston said she sent multiple notes from her nurse at Full Circle Women’s Health to the regional office’s human resources department, stating that the extra breaks were medically necessary. No one responded, and nothing changed, according to Ms. Hairston and the former human resources manager.
Ms. Hairston’s hands and feet swelled; the clinic’s plastic gloves no longer fit. Her blood pressure got so high that her doctor put her on bed rest when she was seven months pregnant.
She returned to work on strict orders to not work more than six hours a day and to take regular breaks. One day in March, she worked a much longer shift. She soon became so sick that her doctor told her to go back on bed rest. A few days later, on March 23, she went to the hospital. Doctors performed an emergency C-section. She was 34 weeks pregnant.
When she had been on maternity leave for eight of the 12 weeks guaranteed by the Family and Medical Leave Act, Planned Parenthood’s human resources department called her multiple times and urged her to return to work early, Ms. Hairston said. She emailed the department and said she felt “discriminated against.” She resigned in June.
“I didn’t get into the medical field to be treated like this,” she said.
The last she heard from Planned Parenthood was a letter asking her to donate money. She threw it in the trash.
Alyssa Milano falsely says that Linda Sarsour does not support Sharia law
Alyssa Milano was recently on a panel at Politicon.
Laura Loomer asked the following question to Milano:
“My question is for you, Alyssa Milano. You are friends with Linda Sarsour, and both of you ladies have positioned yourselves as speakers and representatives of the #MeToo movement. I want to ask you right now to disavow Linda Sarsour because she is a supporter of Sharia law. And under Sharia law, women are oppressed, women are forced to wear a hijab. My question is, will you please disavow her because she is advocating for Sharia law?”
Milano answered:
“She’s not. She’s not.”
Then a security guard escorted Loomer out of the room.
Milano was lying when she answered Loomer’s question.
Sarsour organized the Women’s March in January 2017. Prior to this, Sarsour had made the following four tweets in favor of the U.S. adopting Sharia law:
Sarsour made this tweet, which says the following:
“10 weeks of PAID maternity leave in Saudi Arabia. Yes PAID. And ur worrying about women driving. Puts us to shame.”
She also made this tweet, which says:
“shariah law is reasonable and once u read into the details it makes a lot of sense. People just know the basics”
and this tweet, which says:
“You’ll know when you’re living under Sharia Law if suddenly all your loans & credit cards become interest free. Sound nice, doesn’t it?”
and this tweet, which says:
“If you are still paying interest than Sharia Law hasn’t taken over America.”
These statements prove that Sarsour wants the U.S. to adopt Sharia law. Sharia law bans women from driving cars, prohibits women from appearing alone in public, calls for girls to have their genitals mutilated, and gives a woman’s testimony in court only half the value of a man’s. After Sarsour made those tweets, liberals chose her to be one of the organizers of the 2017 Women’s March. But any movement which truly cared about women’s rights would not support someone who wants the U.S. to treat women in such a horrible and repulsive manner.
Of course the Women’s March from 2017 had nothing to do with helping women, and everything to do with promoting left wing politics. Although right wing women were allowed to participate (because it was in a public place), none were invited to give speeches. Only left wing women were invited to give speeches.
Alyssa Milano was lying when she said that Linda Sarsour does not support Sharia law.
The fact that a security guard then escorted Loomer out of the room is absurd.
I miss the old days, when liberals were against the oppression of women, instead of being in favor of it like they are today.
Here’s video of the conversation between Loomer and Milano:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxrHOlSYNkY
Kavanaugh accuser asks Senate to limit press access for hearing
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/sep/25/accuser-senate-limit-press-kavanaugh-hearing/
Kavanaugh accuser asks Senate to limit press access for hearing
September 25, 2018
Christine Blasey Ford’s lawyers have asked senators to limit the press who will be allowed in the room to cover Thursday’s hearing with her and Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and sought to dictate at least some of the outlets.
Coverage is one of a number of issues Ms. Blasey Ford’s lawyers are negotiating with Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Michael Bromwich said in emails sent Tuesday afternoon that he was requesting access for three “robocams,” three specific wire services, photographers from the Associated Press, Reuters and one unspecified service, and a pool reporter for newspapers and magazines. In a follow-up email he specified that the robocams should be operated by “the CSPAN TV pool,” and said he also wanted space for a radio reporter.
Those emails were among several seen by The Washington Times detailing the tense negotiations between Ms. Blasey Ford’s team and committee staff.
While committees sometimes limit press based on space at hearings, and some witnesses have arranged to have their identities shielded, longtime Capitol Hill watchers struggled to think of precedent for a witness dictating terms of press coverage.
In Ms. Blasey Ford’s case she has received threats since she went public with her story, and her team has insisted the committee guarantee her safety as she testifies, as well as limited access to the hearing.
Ms. Blasey Ford has accused Judge Kavanaugh of an attempted sexual assault at a party when they were both high school students in the early 1980s. He has vehemently denied the accusation, and as yet no contemporaneous witness has come forward to verify her allegations.
She has agreed to testify but has laid out a number of parameters and is objecting to some of Republicans’ plans.
One major sticking point is the GOP’s plans to use a female lawyer hired specifically for this hearing to ask questions on behalf of the Republican senators. That lawyer will question both Judge Kavanaugh and Ms. Blasey Ford, according to one email from Mike Davis, the chief counsel for nominations to Chairman Chuck Grassley.
Debra Katz, another of Ms. Blasey Ford’s lawyers, said in a Tuesday morning message they still haven’t been told who that outside lawyer will be.
“Please let us know if you have similarly withheld the name of this person from Mr. Kavanaugh and his counsel. If you have not, which we assume to be the case, can you please explain the disparate treatment?” she wrote. “Please also advise whether Mr. Kavanaugh and his counsel have been given an opportunity to meet with this individual. We would similarly like the opportunity to meet with her at her soonest availability.”
She said in the email that Mr. Davis was refusing to talk by phone, so Ms. Blasey Ford’s team was asking for an in-person meeting.
A spokesman for Mr. Grassley didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Dan from Squirrel Hill's Blog 