Worldwide social and political movements against racism
Casey Sowers followed 14 years of military service with a long career as a project manager in the private sector. During this time, he found himself fighting for equal shared custody of one of his daughters. Prior to this, it had never occurred to Casey to look into the custody industry, or to consider the custody rights of divorced fathers. But after the stress of his own custody battle seriously affected his mental health and job performance, he started to get more involved. Now, Casey is Executive Director of The Fathers' Rights Movement, a nonprofit made up of parents who advocate for 50/50 shared custody. At first, Casey thought the impact of his own custody battle was all psychological. However, when he stopped to think about how many times he'd had to take a call from a lawyer, or find evidence related to his case during work hours, he began to wonder whether custody battles are costing corporate America significant amounts of revenue. This motivated him to launch a pilot study to test this theory. So far, it includes 4,300 people. The groundbreaking study is being released to addresses the impact that inequality in the United States Family Court System has on corporations. This is the most comprehensive research project of its kind that observes the effects that shared parenting and the court system has on not only families, but also corporations and communities. Companies are growing increasingly concerned about the negative effects of divorce litigation on their employees and families, including emotional hardship and mental health issues that lead to decreased productivity and time away from work. Additionally, subpoenas are causing taxing issues for companies to produce massive amounts of documents and testimony under these duress cases. Casey hopes to prove that poor mental health — such as the kind he suffered during his custody battle — affects job performance. And since job performance is tied to corporate revenue loss, it's in corporate America's interest to advocate for a system in which fathers have a fair chance at gaining equal custody of their children. Tune in to this episode of Divorce, Healthy! with Ashley-Nicole Russell, Collaborative Attorney serving Beaufort, Raleigh, and Greenville, NC.
In this episode, I have three stories of incredible women. Story one is about Susanna M. Salter, the first Mayor in the USA, the second, Helen Hulick, a lady who defied a court order for her own ideals, and the third, Juliane Koepcke's amazing story of survival. I hope you enjoy it!Sources for the Susanna M. Salter StoryThe American Women's Rights Movement by Paul D. BuchananWoman's Christian Temperance Union - History.comSusanna Madora Salter - KansapediaSusanna Madora Salter First Woman Mayor - Kansas Historical SocietySources for the Helen Hulick StoryHelen Beebe - WikipediaWomen in Pants - SeamworkKindergarten teacher jailed for wearing pants to court in 1938Sources for the Juliane Koepcke StoryJuliane Koepcke - WikipediaJuliane Koepcke: How I survived a plane crash - BBCJuliane Koepcke Who Survived For 11 Days (Herzog Doc)Survivor still haunted by 1971 air crash - CNNAnd for all three of these stories, I used Newspapers.com★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★
A Dolls House - Henrik Ibsen - Episode 2 - Is It Or Is It Not A Feminist Play? Hi, I'm Christy Shriver and we're here to discuss books that have changed the world and have changed us. I'm Garry Shriver and this is the How to Love Lit Podcast. This is episode two in our three part series over Ibsen's explosive play A Doll's House. Last week, we looked briefly at the life of Ibsen, his early origins in Norway, the beginning of his career all the way to this play- the one that launched him into stratosphere of Theater greats- It still amazes me that his plays are only outperformed by those of William Shakespeare. Crazy!!! We also looked at the very very beginning of this play- we entered the doll house by meeting Nora as she came back from a shopping trip. We talked about her unique role in this play- she is the entire focus of the play- Nora IS the doll- but we also began to expand the metaphor a little bit because we are also introducing the idea that Nora is not the only person playing a part- maybe she isn't the only doll in the house. No, I don't think she is- although she's the most interesting and the focus, no doubt. This play is fascinating because there are so many subtle details that leave subtext about so many psychological and sociological ideas- this is, to a greater or lesser degree- a play about someone we all know- if not about ourselves. To what degree do we all play parts and to what degree do we want to? Do we use people? Are we used being? Are we in a relationship where both parties are using each other? What are the moral implications of this? Does an arrangement like this bring happiness? What are the inevitable consequences- and are these consequences different for men and women because of the different roles we absolutely can't escape either sociologically or biologically on planet earth? And it is that last question that we will start discussing today. Because, if you google this play at all, the unanswered question that has plagued this play- to the chagrin of Ibsen himself for over 100 years is this- IS or is this NOT a feminist play? Is Ibsen advocating for women's rights? HA!! It's really amazing that so many books that have staying power over the centuries end up landing on gender politics? From Antigone to Wuthering Heights to The Scarlet Letter and the Great Gatsby- gender politics is absolutely inescapable at one level or another. Well, it absolutely IS- and speaking of gender politics in the 20s, Hermann Weigand a notable literary critic of that time period once said about having watched the doll's house that “he was, like all men, momentarily shaken by the play. He said this, “Having had the misfortune to be born of the male sex, we slink away in shame, vowing to mend our ways.” Ha! That's funny. I get the feeling since I've also had that very same misfortune that I'm supposed to feel that way after watching a lot of things. Indeed, and, that of course IS the goal of most things women write (I'm kidding- I'm not trying to insult anybody, just having a bit of fun), but having said that, Henrik Ibsen absolutely ran from this “feminist” label. So much so that in May 1898, he gave a speech at a banquet held in his honour by the Norwegian Women's rights league and this is what he said at the speech. “I am not a member of the Women's Rights League. Whatever I have written has been without any conscious thought of making propaganda. I have been more the poet and less the social philosopher than people generally seem included to believe. I thank you for the toast, but must disclaim the honor of having consciously worked for the Women's Right's Movement. I am not even quite clear as to just what this Women's Rights Movement really is. To me, it has seemed a problem of mankind in general. And if you read my books carefully you will understand this. True enough, it is desirable to solve the woman problem, along with all the others; but that has not been the world purpose. My task has been the description of humanity. To be sure, whenever such a description is felt to be reasonably true, the reader will read his own feelings and sentiments into the work of the poet. These are then attributed to the poet; but incorrectly so. Every reader remolds the work beautifully and neatly, each according to his own personality. Not only those who write but also those who read are poets. They are collaborators. They are often more poetical than the poet himself. With these reservations, let me thank you for the toast you have given me. I do indeed recognize that women have an important task to perform in the particular directions; this club is working along. I will express my thanks by proposing a toast to the League for Women's Rights, wishing it progress and success. The task always before my mind has been to advance our country and to give our people a higher standard. To achieve this, two factors are important. It is for the mothers, by strenuous and sustained labor, to awaken a conscious feeling of culture and discipline. This feeling must be awakened before it will be possible to lift the people to a higher plane. It is the women who shall solve the human problem. As mothers, they shall solve it. And, only is that capacity can they solve it? Here lies a great task for women. My thanks! And, success to the League for Women's Rights . Well, Christy, what should we say about that. That seems pretty clear. He is obviously distancing himself from Women's Rights- are we not to take him at his word? I know, and it seems a bit ironic coming from me because I am always insisting that we take people at their word- but in this case, I'm sorry- I have to say- bull malarky- Henrik Ibsen- you are full of it- like it or not- you, darling are a feminist- I don't care what you say!!! This man was absolutely a feminist- and why would you even accept an honor from a women's rights organization if you weren't? What a crazy thing to say while accepting an award- now having said that- I do take him at his word- in the literally since. Meaning if you listen to his words and what they actually mean, what he says here is actually literally true. I do think he doesn't want to be writing propaganda for the women's rights movement. Propaganda in and of itself is the opposite of art. It's not even honest, by most definitions. Ibsen wasn't trying to do that. Also, there is no doubt that he is interested in humanity. But none of those things are mutually exclusive. He's also interested in how sexual politics defines our humanity. Well, as I said before- nothing is more interesting on planet earth than humans and there is no doubt how men and women relate is a “problem” to use his language that we cant really solve.. Well, there's no doubt. But Ibsen because of his interesting friend group in the theater, had a different perspective on gender politics than most men living traditional Scandanavian lives at the turn of the century. The women in Ibsen's world were extremely strong women. They were building careers in the theater; involved in creative endeavors, highly educated. We know this from reading his biography, but we also know that by reading his work. Ibsen creates stories where the women outshine their male counterparts over and over and over again. He was almost drawn to stories where women were grappling with patriarchial societies and the imbalances of power within them. The women who filled Ibsen's world really are a fascinating subgroup. Well, that's a whole tangent, and don't think I'm not tempted to go down it, not all of those stories, though, reflect super-well on Ibsen. As far as his relationship with his wife, Suzanna goes, their son weighed in on that relationship later on his life and basically credited his mother for Ibsen's entire career. Apparently there were many times when he wanted to give up- he didn't have the stamina for it in the early days- and it seems to me that even his personality was much weaker than hers. Sigurd said this, “The world can thank my mother that it has one bad painter the fewer and got a great writer instead.” Suzannah was for sure a strong influence obviously, but beyond his wife, Aasta Hansteen, was a very famous and outspoken advocate for women's rights in Norway at that time, and I know she was a good friend of Ibsen. I may want to circle back to some of the history of women's rights next week after we get to the conclusion of the play because it is certainly something to think about in the context of the play's ending. But there is no downplaying the realities that being a single or divorced woman in Scandanavia or really anywhere in the Western World was not the easiest path to take in life at that time. No doubt, And I think how this affected women's psychology really fascinated Ibsen on an personal level as well as a professional level. On a different occasion when talking about laws, Ibsen can be quoted as saying this, A woman cannot be herself in contemporary society; it is an exclusively male society with laws drafted by men, and with counsels and judges who judge feminine conduct from the male point of view” , and then my favorite Ibsen political quote was when they asked him about property rights for married women. He said that men should not even be consulted in drafting this law because and I quote, “to consult men in such a matter is like asking wolves if they desire better protection of the sheep” . Okay, so back to the question of whether ibsen was a feminist, I think there is enough indicting evidence to suggest that Ibsen was involved at least in sympathy with the imbalance of power in a patriarchial society. However, I would like to point out that women are not without power in every generation. And I think that's a very nice way to say that, he did see the disadvantages of a society where distribution of power was so unevenly distributed between the sexes, but having said that, I think Ibsen , at least in this plays, does not see women as necessarily powerless even in this unequal society- and it is this dynamic that he highlights. I'm not even sure, Ibsen would suggest that if society was unequally balanced and the balance of power favored women, women would be less tyrrancial then men- but that's a different question altogether- a play yet to be written, I think. Where I want us to land, as we open our discussion of the play today, is to take a position on this issue before we even read the play. I want to come down on the side that sees this play as a feminist play. I agree. I absolutely don't think we can escape that. Having said that, writing a play where the theme is men are bad is not interesting. It's been done over and over and over again. In fact, I've ready high school creative magazines filled with poems that pound that theme to death. No play will stick around in popularity for over 100 years if that's all it has. There has to be more. This play is focusing on women-but in particular- one woman- and it's looking at several things as we look at this one women- one of them is how this imbalance of power between sexes affects a marriage and a homelife in general. But there are other things as well. A Doll's House is a such a personal play in some sense. As Thorton Wilder tells us in Our Town, most people choose to go through life with another person. So, this is about how some people live that life- a way that's slightly cynical maybe. This play pulls back the curtain on this couple and their love affair. Two people who think they are in love. But we are left to question this reality- what is the basis of this love? What is the basis of this marriage? Their lives are great. They have had lots of fun. They've traveled. They have children. He has a good job. She spends her days shopping. But Ibsen is asking- okay- so now- what is the basis of the relationship between these two people- what is it really? Could it be something besides a devoted commitment to walk through life together? Could it be something like societal expectations, competitive relationships with people outside the home, personal narcissism or simply the objectification of another person? Ibsen exposes a marital reality that way too many people see in their own lives and relationships and wish they didn't. He asks questions that many people ask years into a marriage after they've tried one way of living and are now questioning the wisdom of those choices? So, Christy, are we ready to open up this text and walk through the rest of Act 1-2? I think so, last week, we read a little bit of this dialogue between Torvald and Nora. It's so awful. He's so condescending. He calls her by animal names and not even cool animal names like Flying Phoenix or Cunning Fox- he goes with little squirrel. For the record, Christy hates Torvald's names, if you can't tell. And just so you know, I have not been able to resist the temptation to call Christy my little skylark and my little squirrel for the last two days- and every time I do it, if I'm within strking distance I pat her on the top of her head. I may as well tell you, I've been enjoying it, but I'm not sure that she appreciates it in the spirit that is intended. The pat on the head is particularly awful. It highlights my height impairment. Since this is a podcast, you don't know this about me, but I'm a full 11 inches shorter than Garry- so patting me on the head is particularly awful. It's awesome. And it's not just the animal terms- although I find those hilarious. Using the dimunuitive by adding the word “little” all the time and then the possessive adjective “my” multiples the level of condescension. I can feel it as I say it and as I pat you on the head, my little squirrel. Good Lord. Ibsen leaves absolutely zero room for doubt that Torvald views Nora as his possession- his prized and most expensive possession, and even one that he loves dearly- but clearly a possession. That is premise number one in Ibsen's argument. Having set that up, though, he switches gears and immediately proceeds to paint Nora very unglamorously. She condescends to Mrs. Linde almost as much as Torvald does to her, albeit it's way more passive aggressive. Some people really think Mrs. Linde is supposed to represent some sort of a feminine ideal, but I don't know about that. In fact, I know I don't think she is. She is most certainly at this point in her life an independent working woman. She is more authentic and self-aware than Nora. She's been exposed to life and has not had the insulation money buys. She's suffered and had to figure things out for herself. She wasn't raised with money and as a woman in a patriarchal society, has incredible challenges in getting some. When she arrives to talk to Nora we find out these two haven't seen each other for years. Nora has made good because she landed a good. Husband. Kristine married well too, but her sugar daddy died and left her broke. Nora knows this about Kristine, so she does what so many girls do when confronted with an old girlfriend who's fallen on bad times- she hijacks the conversation and brags on herself- making sure in the most sympathetic of ways, that the other person knows, she's done quite well for herself. Oh my, girls would never do that to each other. Ha! And I can hear the irony in your voice as you say that. Garry, btw, has worked in a girls school for the last five years, so he's seen this play out more than once. That's the entire game we play. I'm a smart enough man not to comment here, but let's read the passage. Read page 1814 I know a man who's wife did something similar to what Nora is doing here, and let me say, this woman at the time was in her 50s. She had invited a friend to stay with her because her friend's husband had left her and she was entitled to no alimony. The woman had no real career but had lived a pretty nice lifestyle now she had nothing- and was falling from a comfortable life to a dubious one. Well, the woman I know invited her to stay in Memphis in order to “console” her, but two days before she came, she bought all new outfits complete with brand new jewelry- for each day of her friend's visit. She also bought fancy food they usually didn't eat and prepared elegant desserts. She pulled out fancy china and for the duration of the visit used them pretending that was the normal course of daily life. I remember the event because it seemed particularly cruel to subtextually brag on how great your life was in comparison- but it was done so nicely. Oh yes, female aggression can be so subtle- and we all feel it even if it's nice- we just know we're uncomfortable. It's very different than how men treat each other or even treat women. And I guess that's what we see here because Kristine fights back- also subtextually, of course, She mocks Nora for being so naïve and having lived a sheltered life. She turns all that bragging about being pampered, and changes it to an accusation of being sheltered and basically stupid. And so, not to be out done and to prove to Kristine that she's as sophisticated as Kristine, Nora brags about her little financial tryst and we learn about this debt she has incurrred- and it's a big debt- Nora has recklessly taken enormous debt to fund an entire trip to Italy for a solid year and she did this with absolutely NO ability or plan as to how she would ever repay it. In some ways it seems it didn't even occur to her at the time she did it, that that was a thing that would eventually have to be done. That's the side of Nora that is unattractive and makes me not feel bad for her being called a little squirrel. Well, that's true, but in another very real way, you have to feel a little sympathy for Nora. The text never questions her motives. She did it for love. She did it to save her husband, and although nobody knows about it, she has pride for having saved her husband's life. He is her provider and the provider of her children, and he was unable to provide, so she managed it- and she did it all without wounding his pride- something she KNEW would kill him. There is nobility in that. She's been carrying around a huge secret burden for a decade- working secretly and all of this knowing it was the only way at her disposal to save her husband's life. Ten years is a long time, and if you take her at her word which we have to do- and compare her to Kristine- she has something to be proud of, she saved Torvald's life. She did what she had to do to keep from becoming Kristine- or even worse because she has three children to provide for. Kristine does not. Of course, I can concede that. You know, I was going to mention, Ibsen got the plot for this story from a real person. Ibsen had a protégé by the name of Laura Petersen Kieler. She was a Norwegian journalist and he was extremely fond of her. Another one of his strong female friends? Exactly, anyway, she was married to a man who was extremely paranoid about debt. Laura, as his wife, did what Nora did, and secretly borrowed money to finance an Italian vacation for him to recover from tuberculosis. She worked frantically to repay the loan, exhausted herself, turned in hackwork, but still couldn't pay back the debt so she forged a check. Her husband found out, used her crime as grounds to divorce her, claimed she was a unfit mother and had her committed to an insane asylum. That's terrible. Well, it is and it really upset Ibsen. He told Suzannah about it as well as several friends. One friend wrote him back and said this about the entire thing, “She has committed a forgery, and is proud of it; for she has done it out of love for her husband, to save his life. But this husband of hers takes his standpoint, conventionally honorable, on the side of the law, and sees the situation with male eyes.” And so we see the inspiration for this play- the legal part anyway. Torvald is not like that guy in the sense that that particular man in real life was obviously mean. I don't see meanness in Torvald, but Ibsen is making a much larger point that would have been lost had Torvald been obviously cruel and abusive. This play is not about cruelties and abuses. It's about using people, even if it appears to be consensual. It's about the lack of intellectual and emotional intimacy in a marriage. And that brings me back to Nora because, she IS the deal And although the bigger point of this play is the marital relationship- as a way of understanding this complex thing which is the marital relationship between a man and a woman from the vantage point of a woman, Ibsen surrounds Nora with other relationships. The Nora of Act 1 projects perfection. She has a wonderful husband who adores her, three beautiful children and a nanny to take care of them. The only thing that is keeping her from total perfection is money- enter Dr. Rank. Oh yes, the rich old man dying of congenital syphilis without any dependents who comes over every day, oh and by the way- who is in love with Nora. Nora's relationship with Dr. Rank is another one of those things that we've all seen play out in real life and makes us uncomfortable. Here it doesn't make Nora look very good either. Nora is keenly aware that her physical appearance is sexually alluring to Dr. Rank. They have never acknowledged this with words, but the sexually charged subtext of their relationship allows her to be seductive and he to be seduced without anything physical ever really happening. It's an obvious and open game. In Act 2, she hits him lightly over the ear with her stocking that she's been dangling before him with the pretext of displaying part of the costume she will wear at the dance. It is an open game so much so that Mrs. Linde, when she finds out about Nora's debt, erroneously assumes that Dr. Rank was Nora's lender. It's the obvious assumption. And all that playful secret keeping between Nora and Dr. Rank in front of Mrs. Linde just enhances this idea of fake intimacy between the two, she even cusses in front of Dr. Rank- something she doesn't haven't permission to do with her husband. Dr. Rank encourages her to say the D word just as she's hiding more macaroons from Torvald. Torvald prohibits cussing and macaroons in his little skylark. Ugh- There is so much awful there. Ibsen cleverly imbeds the idea that there is a possibility Rank will leave his fortune to Nora. I know we're jumping ahead but in Act 2 when they chat in the darkening living room, and she reveals her flesh-colored stockings, Dr. Rank expresses a desire to leave for Nora, to use his words, “some poor show of gratitude” as a guarantee he will be remembered fondly… Yes, and since were jumping to Act 2 and that discussion between Nora and Dr. Rank, Nora demonstrates nobility when she shuts down the game between them. She let the opportunity slip by to get the money from Dr. Rank- although I do think she considers it. In fact, she considers it all the way until he says out loud what they both had known to be true about his feelings for her. He would have given her whatever she wanted for just a little sexual cajolery. Nora rejects him and tells the maid to turn up the light. She is not going to add what would feel like prostitution to her list of indiscretions. In other words, she's creating her own sense of moral boundaries and rejects the easy way out. So, let's drop back a little back to Act 1 and introduce the man who is bringing all these ambiguous moral choices to the surface- Krogstad. This is the man who has been fired by Torvald, who has lent Nora money, who has blackmailed Nora to convince her husband to give him his job and AND who, as we have found out, was the man in love with Kristine back in the day and who she dumped for the rich guy who she married and who is now dead. Krogstad, according to Dr. Rank is “rotten to the core”, and Rank doesn't even know about his blackmailing of Nora or any of that other stuff. The general understanding of Krogstad is that he is a man with criminal record for having committed forgery. Torvald wants him gone from the bank because he doesn't feel Krogstad has publically paid for his indiscretion PLUS and this is the worst part as far as Torvald is concerned- Krogstad was a childhood friend and this association is embarrassing. Let's read the part where Torvald tells Nora about his feelings towards Krogstad. Read 1831-1832 Torvald's speech is remarkably strongly worded and unwavering. It's not even the way he usually talks to Nora. None of the playful childlike condescension. She's always known that if her husband found out what she's done, the relationship would be problematic at least at first, but this speech seems particularly stern. She even voiced a hope that maybe one day when it's all over and she's old and unattractive, knowing the story might be something he could appreciate after the fact. Yeah- that dream is dead. I also think it's terrible that he makes this connection to historical “sin”- as if this is something that is passed down through families. I'm really unsure what to make of it, but Ibsen imbeds the generational thing one way or another into every character in the story. Nora's dad apparently was a negligent father. Dr. Rank's father left his the gift of syphilis, Kristine's father was such a negligent father that she married a man she didn't love FOR money forsaking one she did and who loved her back. And here, Krogstad is accused of being an unfit parent although we find out over the course of the play that the reason he wants to regain his respectability is so that he redeem himself as an honorable man for his sons- to become a good father. It certainly adds a little of a spiritual dimension into a play that is set at one of Christianity's two holy days or high holidays – This play actually demonstrates two views Christmas, if you want to take it even further. Christmas has a secular dimension in every household. That's why many people celebrate Christmas who are not Christians. It's an end of the year celebration- parties, gifts, and it is in this sense that the tree is at the center of the Helmer house- but that is not the redemptive story of Christmas that we will see play out later in Kristine (another word which has its origins in Christ and Krogstad). Torvald and even Rank's worldview leave no room for Christmas redemption, as Rank reminds us that nothing is ever free and Torvald reminds us that our personal flaws are things that we can pass down generationally to our children- our mistakes can ever be reclaimed- generational curses. Nora's comments at the end of this Christmas sermon show us that she's conflicted, maybe for the first time in her life, in accepting Torvald's worldview at face value. She doesn't feel like a mother corrupting her children, but maybe she is- maybe she is toxic like the man he's described. Maybe her “sin” can ever be redeemed, no matter how many years she sits of doing copying work and paying back her debt. She's not sure about that, but she is sure that Torvald must NEVER know the truth about her because HE believes it is. Another very interesting thing that happens, and we see this in people who are in relationships with people who live in relationships that are unequal- - Nora, seemingly for the first time in her life, questions whether the man she has always seen as infallible, may not have truth. She is emerging from a fog, if you want to understand it like that. When we have unequal relationships like this, be it for any reason, when one party begins to question this inequality, things often burn to the ground. And there is no doubt Nora is questioning the status quo, the game she has played, even enjoyed. There is a lot of hide and seek in this game and in this play. The children are physically playing hide and seek, but they are supposed to be playing they're children- it's a childish thing to do. But it's not a fun game as an adult. Nora and Torvald play hide and seek. Even Kristine has to hide in the room away from Torvald. Nora is questioning the game. The first Act of this play is about society. The Helmers project domestic happiness to everyone they know. The central metaphor is the Christmas tree. It's decorated with innocent material secrets, wrapped gifts. Nora wants to wrap money on it. It is the expression of the good life: the good job, the good house, the good children, the beautiful wife- everything Torvald wants to project to the world. Krogstad threatens all of this, and in Act 2 we see this shift. Notice that the Christmas tree in Act 2 is stripped, bedraggled and with its candles burnt out. The values of Act 2 shift from material, physical and social to invisible and psychological ones. Nora confides in Christine the nature of her relationship with Rank and the strange fantasies that go with that- that game is exposed. The dialogue between Nora and Krogstad in Act 2 shifts to a discussion from the social nature of Nora's crime to a much darker one- the psychological ones. Krogstad leaves a letter in Torvald's box. That secret will be exposed too. Nora and Krogstad talk about her consideration of suicide as a way out. Krogstad is the one person in the world, ironically that understands her. The major metaphor for the scene also shifts. In Act 2, we are no longer going to talk about Christmas trees, we are moving to the tarantela- the dance of the spider. And learning about the tarantela is where I thought we would end today with Act 2, but time has got the better of us, so let's pick up with the tarantela next episode. Next episode we will start with the end of Act 2 and talk about what's so interesting about the tarantela, which by the way is the music from the intake and outtake in case you wanted to know what it sounds like and haven't actually seen a performance eof the play. After that we'll follow through to the end of the play and its famous ending. If you haven't read this play in a while, read it, watch it, or listen to a version on an audio version. It never gets old. There's a lot to look forward to. I hope you'll pick back up next episode. Thanks for listening and as always we invite you to connect with us any way you like: Instagram, facebook, linked in, twitter, our website howtolovelitpodcast.com. Also, and most importantly, please help us grow by talking about us and texting an episode to a friend.
Children have the right to be raised by both their mother and father. That used to be a noncontroversial idea. But no longer. In their eye-opening 2021 book, Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children's Rights Movement (Post Hill Press, 2021), Katy Faust and Stacy Manning examine how children have been damaged by such developments as no-fault divorce, marriage equality, and the largely unregulated fields of surrogacy and in-vitro-fertilization. They argue that in the quest for the satisfaction of the desires of adults (the “Us” of the title), children (the “Them” of the title) have been treated as afterthoughts and made into tiny cheerleaders for lifestyles that have deprived the child of either a father or a mother by design. The authors quote extensively from a broad range of now adult children of same-sex couples, surrogacy and children of “donors” of sperm or eggs—which are not usually donated but bought and paid for. These personal testimonies are heartbreaking and expose the cost to the children of these arrangements and technologies. One example from a woman conceived via egg donation: It bothers me that I cost money, that the one woman I want most in this life is a stranger yet 50 percent of me. Sometimes I wish I weren't born. I didn't ask for this, and I never would have consented to it. The child of a male same-sex couple says: My five-year-old brain could not understand why I didn't have the mom that I suddenly desperately wanted. I felt the loss. I felt the hole. As I grew, I tried to fill that hole with aunts, my dads' lesbian friends, and teachers. I remember asking my first-grade teacher if I could call her Mom. I asked that question of any woman who showed me any amount of love and affection. It was instinctive. I craved a mother's love even though I was well loved by my two gay dads. This is an invaluable, gripping record in their own words of the trauma inflicted on children of this brave new world. They are moving documents that show the dark side of social and scientific changes that are often lauded as utterly desirable and unproblematic. Faust and Manning detail the repercussions of three categories of intentional parental loss: children who experienced divorce and abandonment, children with LGBT parents, and children born of surrogacy and via sperm and/or egg donation. They point out, for example, the startling contrast between adoption (heavily regulated) and surrogacy (basically, shockingly unregulated). This is an expose of historic importance. It should be read by anyone interested in the fields of bioethics, sociology, psychology, child development, law, public policy, gender studies and concerned about the fate of children born of reproductive technologies or raised intentionally without a mother or a father. The ramifications of these vast and sudden changes have not been addressed sufficiently or candidly outside of conservative scholarly circles. A crucial readership for this book is that of would-be parents considering having children outside of a traditional marriage or producing children via sperm or egg donation. Read what the children of such arrangements say of their lifelong pain and feelings of loss before you rush into a parenthood that cannot take place without intentional biological parent deprivation. We'll talk today with Katy Faust, the founder and director of Them Before Us and the co-author of this important book about the rights of children. Give a listen. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network
Children have the right to be raised by both their mother and father. That used to be a noncontroversial idea. But no longer. In their eye-opening 2021 book, Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children's Rights Movement (Post Hill Press, 2021), Katy Faust and Stacy Manning examine how children have been damaged by such developments as no-fault divorce, marriage equality, and the largely unregulated fields of surrogacy and in-vitro-fertilization. They argue that in the quest for the satisfaction of the desires of adults (the “Us” of the title), children (the “Them” of the title) have been treated as afterthoughts and made into tiny cheerleaders for lifestyles that have deprived the child of either a father or a mother by design. The authors quote extensively from a broad range of now adult children of same-sex couples, surrogacy and children of “donors” of sperm or eggs—which are not usually donated but bought and paid for. These personal testimonies are heartbreaking and expose the cost to the children of these arrangements and technologies. One example from a woman conceived via egg donation: It bothers me that I cost money, that the one woman I want most in this life is a stranger yet 50 percent of me. Sometimes I wish I weren't born. I didn't ask for this, and I never would have consented to it. The child of a male same-sex couple says: My five-year-old brain could not understand why I didn't have the mom that I suddenly desperately wanted. I felt the loss. I felt the hole. As I grew, I tried to fill that hole with aunts, my dads' lesbian friends, and teachers. I remember asking my first-grade teacher if I could call her Mom. I asked that question of any woman who showed me any amount of love and affection. It was instinctive. I craved a mother's love even though I was well loved by my two gay dads. This is an invaluable, gripping record in their own words of the trauma inflicted on children of this brave new world. They are moving documents that show the dark side of social and scientific changes that are often lauded as utterly desirable and unproblematic. Faust and Manning detail the repercussions of three categories of intentional parental loss: children who experienced divorce and abandonment, children with LGBT parents, and children born of surrogacy and via sperm and/or egg donation. They point out, for example, the startling contrast between adoption (heavily regulated) and surrogacy (basically, shockingly unregulated). This is an expose of historic importance. It should be read by anyone interested in the fields of bioethics, sociology, psychology, child development, law, public policy, gender studies and concerned about the fate of children born of reproductive technologies or raised intentionally without a mother or a father. The ramifications of these vast and sudden changes have not been addressed sufficiently or candidly outside of conservative scholarly circles. A crucial readership for this book is that of would-be parents considering having children outside of a traditional marriage or producing children via sperm or egg donation. Read what the children of such arrangements say of their lifelong pain and feelings of loss before you rush into a parenthood that cannot take place without intentional biological parent deprivation. We'll talk today with Katy Faust, the founder and director of Them Before Us and the co-author of this important book about the rights of children. Give a listen. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law
On episode 269 we discuss the Biloela family, who came to Australia from Sri Lanka due to the persecution of the Tamil people. We also discuss refugee law, as well as the state of the refugee issue and refugee rights activism in Australia. We finish the episode by promoting the upcoming Rally for Refugee Rights: Permanent Visas not Discrimination. This rally is on the 25th of July around Australia. Here are the details for the Melbourne event, for those outside of Melbourne look online to find a rally near you! https://www.facebook.com/events/912767129576379/ Clips: Streets are Getting Hot by Blue King Brown and Diafrix: https://soundcloud.com/thekeyofsea/06-streets-are-getting-hot Are we the opposition by The Feed SBS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmeypIUKEdQ Asylum by Combat Wombat: https://combatwombat.bandcamp.com/track/asylum-2 For more information on this episode and for links to all of the stories and clips from it, go to: https://progressivepodcastaustralia.com/2021/07/17/269/ If you enjoy the music we play on our show, check out our Spotify playlist Progressive Podcast Australia Music and Comedy! https://open.spotify.com/user/bronzecat83/playlist/6DK5AzWfrxSDcpHWlLsWi6
Katy Faust of Them Before Us Drag Queen Story Hour Activist Arrested For Child Porn, Still Living With His Adopted Kids Them Before Us Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children's Rights Movement
As the Supreme Court sided with a Catholic adoption agency this week, Dr. Grazie Christie talks to Katy Faust about her book, Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children's Rights Movement, discussing how adult desires have shifted the focus from what is most important--our children and their emotional well-being and safety. As the USCCB is meeting this week for their Spring meeting discussing Eucharistic coherence, we also chat with Brian Burch of Catholic Vote about a new poll commissioned exploring what Mass-going Catholics believe on the issue. Father Roger Landry also offers an inspiring homily. especially for dads, this Father's Day weekend! Catch the show every Saturday at 7amET/5pmET on EWTN radio!
CW: frank discussion of misogyny, racism, homophobia, sexual violence, self-harm and suicide Yeah, we read theory. Rachel hops on the mic again for a mondo episode as we pore through Warren Farrell's seminal piece of social study that has been the intellectual backbone of the Men's Rights Movement since the 90's: "The Myth of Male Power". No surprise it's crank horseshit, conjured by a sun-baked San Diego dipshit with terminal End of History Brain. But before you discount his insights entirely, know that Warren also has a lot to say about babies fuckin, you know, hypothetically, as a thought experiment. Intro Music: "I Hate Men (I Hate All Men)" by Talk Show Host Outro Music: "Baby Dick" by Dirt Nasty (Simon Rex) Rachel on Twitter: twitter.com/angrymaxfuryst Fucqboi Book Club on Twitter: twitter.com/FucqboiBookClub Reddit: www.reddit.com/user/FucqBoi_BookClub Curious Cat: curiouscat.me/FucqboiBookClub Youtube: www.youtube.com/channel/UCoUoqOn7ODGDt0u4KgOMlDw Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/23RKtL8UyckT6gyah9YDH5 Cover art by Rachel: twitter.com/angrymaxfuryst
Dovetailing off recent episodes of this podcast - Episode #116 'Why Men Hate Going to Church' and Episode #130 'Reverse Sexism in American Churches' - I want to talk about the Men's Rights Movement. Micah Hershberger sent me two videos this week to mull over. Watch for our forthcoming episode of On The Rocks podcast in which we discuss those further. But for this episode, I want to take some time to process and unpack Cassie Jaye's documentary The Red Pill, and also this YouTube summary of what is being called MGTOW - the acronym for "Men Going Their Own Way." What should we make of these responses to feminism in our day? And do they perhaps in part explain why fewer young people today are getting married and settling down to raise a family than in previous generations? Let us bravely embrace the risk of offending everyone except the Almighty by delving into these matters so we can discern what is good and true, and how men and women can and should live in peace and harmony with one another according to God's Word. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/garrett-ashley-mullet/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/garrett-ashley-mullet/support
Katy Faust is the Founder and Director of Them Before Us, which exists to advance social policies that encourage adults to actively respect the rights of children rather than expecting children to sacrifice their fundamental rights for the sake of adult desires. Katy’s new book Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children’s Rights Movement has flipped the script on adult-centric attitudes toward marriage, parenthood, and reproductive technologies by framing these issue around a child’s right to be raised by both their mother and father. Follow: Them Before Us Follow: Katy Faust Date: 06/03/21 To help UnAborted create more pro-life content and take our content to the streets, become a Patron of the show at https://www.patreon.com/unaborted To help Seth reach more high school and college students through pro-life presentations around the country, become a monthly supporter at https://prolifetraining.com/donate/
Episode 39:This week we're continuing our reading of Women, Race & Class by Angela Y. Davis.The full book is available online here:https://archive.org/details/WomenRaceClassAngelaDavis [Part 1 - 2]1. THE LEGACY OF SLAVERY: STANDARDS FOR A NEW WOMANHOOD [Part 3 - This Week]2. THE ANTI-SLAVERY MOVEMENT AND THE BIRTH OF WOMEN'S RIGHTSReading – 00:28Discussion – 33:10[Part 4 - 5]3. CLASS AND RACE IN THE EARLY WOMEN'S RIGHTS CAMPAIGN[Part 6]4. RACISM IN THE WOMAN SUFFRAGE MOVEMENT[Part 7]5. THE MEANING OF EMANCIPATION ACCORDING TO BLACK WOMEN[Part 8]6. EDUCATION AND LIBERATION: BLACK WOMEN'S PERSPECTIVE [Part 9]7. WOMAN SUFFRAGE AT THE TURN OF THE CENTURY: THE RISING INFLUENCE OF RACISM[Part 10]8. BLACK WOMEN AND THE CLUB MOVEMENT [Part 11]9. WORKING WOMEN, BLACK WOMEN AND THE HISTORY OF THE SUFFRAGE MOVEMENT [Part 12 - 13]10. COMMUNIST WOMEN[Part 14 - 15]11. RAPE, RACISM AND THE MYTH OF THE BLACK RAPIST [Part 16 - 17]12. RACISM, BIRTH CONTROL AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS [Part 18-19]13. THE APPROACHING OBSOLESCENCE OF HOUSEWORK: A WORKING-CLASS PERSPECTIVEFootnotes:1) – 00:48Douglass, op. cit., p. 469. 2) – 01:01Ibid., p. 472. 3) – 01:37Ibid. 4) – 02:04Ibid. 5) – 02:34Stowe, op. cit. Frederick Douglass included the following comments in his autobiography: “In the midst of these fugitive slave troubles came the book known as Uncle Tom's Cabin, a work of marvelous depth and power. Nothing could have better suited the moral and human requirements of the hour. Its effect was amazing, instantaneous, and universal. No book on the subject of slavery had so generally and favorably touched the American heart. It combined all the power and pathos of preceding publications of the kind, and was hailed by many as an inspired production. Mrs. Stowe at once became an object of interest and admiration.” (Douglass, op. cit., p. 282) 6) – 03:17Stowe, op. cit., p. 107. 7) – 05:07See Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirdre English, “Microbes and the Manufacture of Housework,”Chapter 5 of For Her Own Good: 150 Years of the Experts' Advice to Women (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1978). Also Ann Oakley, Woman's Work: The Housewife Past and Present (New York: Vintage Books, 1976). 8) – 06:19See Eleanor Flexner, Century of Struggle: The Women's Rights Movement in the U.S. (New York: Atheneum, 1973). Also Mary P. Ryan, Womanhood in America (New York: New Viewpoints, 1975). 9) – 07:04See Aptheker, Nat Turner's Slave Rebellion (New York: Humanities Press, 1966); Harriet H.Robinson, Loom and Spindle or Life Among the Early Mill Girls (Kailua, Hawaii: Press Pacifica, 1976). Also Wertheimer, op. cit., and Flexner, op. cit. 10) – 07:49Robinson, op. cit., p. 51. 11) – 08:22See discussion of this tendency to equate the institution of marriage with that of slavery in Pamela Allen, “Woman Suffrage: Feminism and White Supremacy,”Chapter V of Robert Allen, Reluctant Reformers (Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press, 1974), pp. 1368. 12) – 09:28Wertheimer, op. cit., p. 106.13) – 10:07See Flexner, op. cit., pp. 38–40. Also Samuel Sillen, Women Against Slavery (New York: Masses and Mainstream, Inc., 1955), pp. 11–16. 14) – 11:18Sillen, op. cit., p. 13. 15) – 12:10Ibid. 16) – 12:31Ibid., p. 14. 17) – 14:15Liberator, January 1, 1831. Quoted in William Z. Foster, The Negro People in American History (New York: International Publishers, 1970), p. 108. 18) – 16:10Sillen, op. cit., p. 17.19) – 16:53Ibid. 20) – 17:04The first woman to speak publicly in the United States was the Scottish-born lecturer and writer Frances Wright (see Flexner, op. cit., pp. 27–28). When the Black woman Maria W. Stewart delivered four lectures in Boston in 1832, she became the first native-born woman to speak publicly (see Lerner, op. cit., p. 83).21) – 17:49Flexner, op. cit., p. 42. See the text of the constitution of the Philadelphia Female Anti-Slavery Society in Judith Papachristou, editor, Women Together: A History in Documents of the Women's Movement in the United States (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., A Ms. Book, 1976), pp. 4–5. 22) – 18:21Sillen, op. cit., p. 20.23) – 18:45Ibid., pp. 21–22. 24) – 19:22Ibid., p. 25. 25) – 21:29Flexner, op. cit., p. 51.26) – 22:46Ibid. 27) – 23:53Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony and Matilda Joslyn Gage, History of Woman Suffrage,Vol. 1 (1848–1861) (New York: Fowler and Wells, 1881), p. 52. 28) – 24:51Quoted in Papachristou, op. cit., p. 12. See Gerda Lerner's analysis of the pastoral letter in her work The Grimke Sisters from South Carolina: Pioneers for Women's Rights and Abolition (New York: Schocken Books, 1971), p. 189. 29) – 25:03Quoted in Papachristou, op. cit., p. 12.30) – 25:42Ibid. 31) – 26:57Sarah Grimke began publishing her Letters on the Equality of the Sexes in July, 1837. They appeared in the New England Spectator and were reprinted in the Liberator. See Lerner, The Grimke Sisters, p. 187. 32) – 27:31Quoted in Alice Rossi, editor, The Feminist Papers (New York: Bantam Books, 1974), p. 308. 33) – 27:46Ibid. 34) – 28:5834. Quoted in Flexner, op. cit., p. 48. Also quoted and discussed in Lerner, The Grimke Sisters, p. 201. 35) – 30:49Angelina Grimke, Appeal to the Women of the Nominally Free States. Issued by an Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women and Held by Adjournment from the 9th to the 12th of May, 1837 (New York: W. S. Dorr, 1838), pp. 13–14. 36) – 31:17Ibid., p. 21. 37) – 31:34Flexner, op. cit., p. 47. 38) – 32:43Lerner, The Grimke Sisters, p. 353.
Michela Griffo talks about the battle for LGBTQ civil rights from the first NYC Pride March in 1970 onward, the arrival of AIDS in 1981, the formation of real gay and lesbian community after that, and where the LGBTQ movement goes from here.
Katy Faust of Them Before Us Drag Queen Story Hour Activist Arrested For Child Porn, Still Living With His Adopted Kids Them Before Us Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children’s Rights Movement
In this episode we talk to Lynda Walker about her political activism in the Communist Party of Ireland, the Northern Ireland Women's Rights Movement, working in education and Women's Studies and the International Brigades Commemoration Committee.
Mike talks with Michela Griffo about her life as an early and active member of the National Organization for Women in the late 1960s, a link to the Stonewall era, and one of a dozen or so participants from the first Gay Pride March in NYC in 1970 who’re still with us. She joins us today to talk about the sense of community that existed then and how different things are today
1:35 Are you taken the vaccine? Why? 11:08 Derrius Guice LSU Running back alleged sexual harassment case 17:42 Deshaun Watson Update and Paul Pierce 24:00 Entertainment business and sexual harassment 29:30 Women wearing the pants men being house husbands 35:31 Athletes and Entertainers committing crimes 42:20 Media glorifying black on black crime 47:27 Changing our community ourselves 51:17 Rich black stars promoting the hood more than rich life 1:00:00 How people spending their stimulus checks
Monday, March 29, 2021 Tuesday’s Point of View host is our own Kerby Anderson! The first hour he shares the stories from the headlines that impact our lives. Kerby’s guest in our second hour is Katy Faust. She shares her new book: Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children’s Rights Movement. In the final hour, Kerby […]
New day, same "heterosexual rights movements", except this time lead by Lil' Mama. We stand with our AAPI community and standing with Ghana's LGBTQ+ community. How the LGBTQ+ friend is the new black friend and the root of toxicity. We go in this episode! This episode is sponsored by Orbitz: orbitz.com/prideShoutouts:Shana - Trans Boxing - @transboxing - Trans boxing is an art project in the form of a boxing club that centers trans and gender variant peopleKris - Jackée Harry - actress, singer, comedian, director, and television personality dykon. Goddesss. For her excellence on 227, Sister Sister and soooooo much more. She’s always been a great ally to the queer community, and showed up again during this Lil' Mama het fest that's going on saying "The lip gloss was never really that poppin’."Bad Queers is co-hosted by:Shana Sumers: @shanahasagramKris Chesson: @kris.chessLet's keep in touch:Email us for advice at firstname.lastname@example.org or DM on InstagramFollow us @badqueerspod on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram & Tik TokShop for official Bad Queers ApparelLove our soundtrack? Check out Siena Liggins: @sienaligginsShoutout to our sponsor HER App
Katy Faust of Them Before Us Drag Queen Story Hour Activist Arrested For Child Porn, Still Living With His Adopted Kids Them Before Us Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children’s Rights Movement
We're trying something new over at Storyteller HQ! After the success of the Story Spine episode, host Lisa Golden and Cathie Swan from Queer Creatives UK are back to cover some of the most interesting storytelling basics!This week we dig into The Hero's Journey. This storytelling framework is part theory, part philosophy.Lisa takes Cathie through the 12 steps of the Hero's Journey, using the 1999 blockbuster hit The Matrix as an example. How does one of the most famous storytelling tools show up in Hollywood, why do our mentors need to be mystical and is this all linked to psychedelics or the Men's Rights Movement? See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
Hey guys in this podcast I will be talking about Lil Mama wanting to start a new movement, Safaree being confused about college classes, and Milan Christopher being sensitive cause he thinks people are bashing the LGBTQ+ community. We will also be discussing new stories and updates on stories we have previously talked about. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app
Enjoy The Convo!!!!---------------------------------------------------------------------Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=42853602 TDGS Merch: https://teespring.com/stores/tdgs-merch ------------------------------------------------------------------------YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxpl_l5LrgEw50djOSb9ixQDon't Forget to tap the notification bellFor All GreeneRadio Inquires: IG: @GreeneRadioEmail Greeneradio1@gmail.com--------------------------------------------------------------------Social Media:Darren:Instagram & Twitter: @TDGSMedia Personal Instagram: @blkkendollEmail: email@example.com-----------------------------------------------------------------------Derek Doll: Instagram: @TheDerekDoll Facebook: @PrinceDerekDollEmail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Welcome back to The Transition Period! In this episode, Gary gets into the Royal Family Debacle, reads the f*ck outta Lil Mama and her dumb ass movement, discusses the Kirk Franklin, discusses The tired ass Grammy's, discusses and mourns the Atlanta Anti-Asian hate crimes, and much more! PLUS, they reveal a big secret at the end.....Skip 37:30 - 43:33 to miss the hate crime discussion. How to help #StopAsianHate: https://www.stopasianhate.info/FREE Sexual Health Resources:heymistr.com - Free at home PrEp & STI Testing (@heymistr)together.takemehome.org - Free OraQuick HIV testsSocial Media Links! Instagram: @transitionperiodpodTwitter: @transperiodpodDrag Instagram: @theonlyafreakkkaPersonal IG/Twitter: @thegaryfuquaAs always, wash your hands, wear a mask, talk some sh*t and shake some a$$!
The movement surrounding the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act introduced some ubiquitous elements of our public infrastructure, but many of the activists who were key players in lobbying for the law's passage met in an unlikely way: as campers at Camp Jened, or lovingly, "Crip Camp," a place of liberation for disabled kids and teenagers. A Netflix documentary called Crip Camp, nominated for an Oscar on Monday, explores the history of the movement and its leaders, including Judy Heumann, a Jened camper turned lifelong disability rights activist. She served as Special Advisor for International Disability Rights for the Obama administration and wrote the book Being Heumann: An Unrepentant Memoir of a Disability Rights Activist. In July, on the anniversary of the ADA, Judy and Brooke discussed how the egalitarian values of Camp Jened helped inspire the ADA, and how social and political change takes shape. This segment originally aired in our July 24th, 2020 program, If You Build It....
This week Chole tells the story of the incredible Marsha P. Johnson, a beautiful Trans Woman who tirelessly fought for the rights and safety of the LGBTQAI+ community. She is widely regarded as one of the pivotal people in the LGBTQAI+ movement and has become a global icon. Marsha was known as the Mother of the Trans Movement. Her generosity of spirit, warmth, her kindness and her fierce belief that she could not stop fighting until all people were free from oppression, makes her a legendary woman whose story we just had to tell.Content warning for this episode – This episode discusses themes of homophobia, transphobia and racism. There is also the use of outdated terminology and slurs in the context of verbatim quotes. The story also talks about transphobic violence and death. This may be triggering for some listeners. If that is you, please take care and know that we love, accept and value you. If this episode brings up any feelings you’d like to discuss, please contact lifeline on 13 11 14. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
The narrative that a child only needs love and safety to thrive is being challenged by Katy Faust, founder of Them Before Us, a nonprofit organization that promotes social policies to protect the rights of children.In her new book, “Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children's Rights Movement,” Faust argues that a child needs a stable home with love from both a mother and a father. Faust joins the “Problematic Women” podcast to share her story and why it's critical that the needs of the child play a key role in debates about same-sex parenting, divorce, sperm- or egg-donor children, and so on. Also on today’s show, we discuss Disney’s Lucasfilm decision to cancel actress Gina Carano, and Carano’s recent appearance on "The Ben Shapiro Show” to tell her side of the story.Plus, we share Heritage Foundation President Kay C. James' recent conversation with the Network of Enlightened Women. James discusses how we can balance life’s many demands and what it means to be a strong, conservative woman.And as always, we’ll be crowning our “Problematic Woman of the Week.”Enjoy the show! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
The narrative that a child only needs love and safety to thrive is being challenged by Katy Faust, founder of Them Before Us, a nonprofit organization that promotes social policies to protect the rights of children.In her new book, “Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children's Rights Movement,” Faust argues that a child needs a stable home with love from both a mother and a father. Faust joins the “Problematic Women” podcast to share her story and why it's critical that the needs of the child play a key role in debates about same-sex parenting, divorce, sperm- or egg-donor children, and so on. We also cover these stories: The Biden administration announces that the government will distribute 25 million masks.A federal judge in Texas blocks President Joe Biden’s deportation pause in a nationwide order. Lindsay Boylan, a former aide to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, details sexual harassment allegations against the governor.Enjoy the show! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
In this hour: - Judge and NRA Board Member Phil Journey discusses the NRA bankruptcy and current legal issues - Should an NRA director who disagrees with Wayne LaPierre resign? - Where is the gun rights movement today? To donate to the NRA bankruptcy lawsuit case: Make payment out to CDFE Mail to CDFE c/o Phil Journey PO Box 501 Haysville, Ks. 67060 All funds donated are tax-deductible and will go toward legal expenses. Tom Gresham's Gun Talk 02.14.21 Hour 1
BEST OF: Kshama Sawant scolded by district three citizen in a local grocery store. KTVU California: “State health officials said they rely on a very complex set of measurements that would confuse and potentially mislead the public if they were made public.” // GUEST: Stacy Manning, co-author of “Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children’s Rights Movement” joins the show to explain her new book release // BEST OF: JUST A FEW MORE THINGS See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Joe Biden takes the reins as the next president of the United States, but his first-day's executive actions show that his call for "unity" is just a hollow platitude. I'll explain why. Plus: Katy Faust discusses why children's rights to their natural mom and dad cannot be superseded by adult desires for twisted versions of a family. Her book is called: "Them Before Us: Why We Need a Global Children's Rights Movement." Join us for Thursday's JANET MEFFERD TODAY.
This is a HTP Replay: Ash and Matt have selected this episode as one of their favourites of the year. Why not give it a listen and let us know what you think? Do you have an episode you thought was the best? Send us a DM in insta :)Bippidty boppidy boo... Ash and Matt roll the sleeves up to talk about Men's Rights. Following a short documentary on BBC, it inspired the two to look at the two different angles of the Men's Rights Movement - what it means and what do they stand for? Is it just a group dead set on destroying feminism or do they have a legit point? What do you think? See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
Presented by Deondra Wardelle, Leader of the #RootCauseRacism Movement Co-Moderated by Mark Graban, Senior Advisor, KaiNexus The 2020 Presidential election is being regarded as the “Election of our Lifetime.” There is a lot at stake on countless ballots whether at the county, city, state, or national level. Tensions are high in America due largely to the Coronavirus pandemic and civil unrest caused by strained race relations. It’s important that “We the People” steady our thoughts, conduct our research, and develop a plan to ensure our voices are heard. We must exercise our right to vote! It doesn’t matter if you vote via absentee ballot, early voting, or if you vote in person on Election Day--now is the time to develop a solid voting plan, and vote for kindness! Join Deondra Wardelle, leader of the #RootCauseRacism movement, and other thought leaders for a panel webinar discussion, as they commemorate the 100th anniversary of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution – Women’s Suffrage and the Women’s Rights Movement. She’ll be joined by Karyn Ross, founder of the Love and Kindness Project – Vote for Kindness Project, Elisabeth Swann and Tracy O'Rourke, Co-Authors of the Problem Solver’s Toolkit and Co-Founders of the JIT Cafe, Brunessa Drayton, a community advocate and political influencer, as well as Chelle Wilson and Jasmyne E. McCoy of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. The panelists will discuss the real and present danger of voter suppression, the importance of knowing your rights, and how to develop a solid voting plan which will ensure your voice is heard in this year’s elections.
Instead of relying on guesswork and opinion to understand why groups of people behave the way they do, today’s technology allows us to analyze and synthesize data. When we truly understand what we all value most, we can unleash enormous passion and power. This is the fundamental disruption of our time: we can now predict and influence what people will do next. David Allison, founder of The Valuegraphics Database, is our guest for this episode of Association Chat podcast. After a career spent developing ideas and concepts to engage stakeholders for several hundred organizations, David Allison recognized the need for a more scientific method to determine what really influences people to do the things they do. The result is The Valuegraphics Database, the first global dataset created specifically to help organizations predict and influence behavior using the values we share. My favorite quote from this interview came right at the end. "If you need any proof that demographics are harmful and hurtful and divisive, and cause all kinds of strife in our world; I'll point you to a few examples. Black Lives Matter. The Gay Rights Movement. The Women's Rights Movement. These are all demographics, demographic groups, standing up and saying, 'Do not treat me like a demographic. Treat me like a human being. Do not judge me based on my gender, my sexual orientation, the color of my skin. None of that matters. I just want to be a human, like the rest of you.' I can't think of any more powerful condemnation of how terrible demographics are for our society." #ValuesThinking #BehavioralScience #DataDriven
July 26th marked the 30th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act, or the ADA. The ADA is a federal law that requires businesses, employers, public facilities, schools, and transportation agencies to make accommodations for disabled people, and helps weed out basic discrimination. When President George HW Bush signed the ADA into law in 1990, it was one of the most comprehensive pieces of civil rights legislation in American history. But the disability rights movement didn’t begin or end with the ADA. In spite of the law’s existence, Americans with disabilities still face discrimination and other barriers to equal rights and opportunities. Today, even though nearly 50 percent of Americans live with at least one disability, few know the history of the fight for disability rights. With Crip Camp, a new documentary on Netflix, filmmakers Jim LeBrecht and Nicole Newnham fill in some of that history through the personal and political stories that started the rise of a movement.
In 2014, a young man named named Elliot Rodger went on a killing spree as revenge for the beautiful women who had denied him the sex he believed he was entitled to. In February of 2020, talk radio host Rush Limbaugh was presented with one of the highest national honors, a man who has never shied away from his theories about the oppressive forces of “Feminazis.” There are growing subcultures of men who subscribe to the idea that is is American men, not women, who are the true victims of oppression, while at the same time, condoning and even committing violence against women. But we’ll look at the far more gentle roots of both the Involuntary Celibacy culture and Men’s Rights Movement, and how they were once spaces of support and solidarity. In order to understand the problems of toxic masculinity, we’ll have to look at all its victims, not just women, but the men that suffer under its demands as well. Please consider donating to A Call to Men (https://www.acalltomen.org/support) Become a patron of our show (https://www.patreon.com/americanhysteria) for extra content each month! Download Best Fiends FREE on the Apple App Store or Google Play Head to https://www.betterhelp.com/ah for 10% off your first month Written, produced, and hosted by Chelsey Weber-Smith (http://www.chelseywebersmith.com) Audio production by Clear Commo Studios (https://clearcommo.com/) Co-researched and written by Riley Smith And co-produced by Miranda Zickler Voice acting also by Will Rogers Follow American Hysteria on social media: Twitter: AmerHysteria (https://twitter.com/AmerHysteria) Instagram: AmericanHysteriaPodcast (https://www.instagram.com/americanhysteriapodcast/) Facebook: Americanhysteriapodcast (https://facebook.com/americanhysteriapodcast)