Today is international women’s day, and one of the biggest topics of debate is equal pay for equal work. Well, Iceland is about to take steps to make sure that becomes less of a concern in the small European country. Today, the Icelandic government announced that it will introduce a law that will require all companies with 25 employees or more be able to prove that they practice pay equality.

Iceland is hoping that this measure will eliminate the pay gap in the country by 2022. And it’s not just about the gender pay gap. The law mandates that public and private companies pay employees equally “regardless of gender, ethnicity, sexuality, or nationality.”

Icelandic Equality and Social Affairs Minister Thorsteinn Viglundsson says that it’s time that the country do something “radical” about the issue. He stated: “Equal rights are human rights. We need to make sure that men and women enjoy equal opportunity in the workplace. It is our responsibility to take every measure to achieve that.”

The proposed law has received some criticism–mostly concerns that it will become burdensome for companies and slow down the pace of business, as it requires that any company with over 25 employees obtain a certificate from the government.

There are a lot of arguments about how large the gender pay gap actually is in individual countries. Iceland is often cited as one of the best nations for equality, but according to a study from Expert Market, a UK-based data firm, Icelandic women earn 14 percent less than their male counterparts. In October 2016, Icelandic women protested the pay gap by walking out of work.

Way to go women of Iceland! Yesterday they protested 14% pay gap by leaving 14% early from work at 2:38pm! https://t.co/fGE9zByatE pic.twitter.com/fx1xjuJznI

— Women Thrive (@WomenThrive) October 26, 2016

Certain nations have policies that involve equal pay certificates. And in Minnesota, “certain contractors must provide equal pay certificates in order to conduct business with the State of Minnesota or certain governmental agencies.” But Iceland is believed to be the first nation to try to implement a law that mandates proof of equal pay.

Iceland is a very small country, so if this measure succeeds it may not be too useful of a model for other nations. But it’s nice to see a country making an effort to advocate for equal pay. After all, we still live in a world where op-eds are published about how women shouldn’t be paid equally. So, carry on, Iceland, and happy International Women’s Day!

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Iceland Proposes Law to Mandate Equal Pay for All by 2020 appeared first on Law Street.

Happy Presidents Day! Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Hey, Donald Trump: What Exactly Happened in Sweden?

Over the weekend, President Donald Trump cited Sweden when discussing terrorism and immigration. “You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this?” he said. But there was no remarkable incident in Sweden the night before. The former Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt commented on Twitter, asking, “What has he been smoking?”

Sweden? Terror attack? What has he been smoking? Questions abound. https://t.co/XWgw8Fz7tj

— Carl Bildt (@carlbildt) February 19, 2017

The Swedish embassy said it asked the White House for an explanation, as no one in Sweden knew what the American president was talking about. And many on Twitter mocked POTUS’s comments, speculating that it could be IKEA-related:

Uncovered: the plans for the terrorist attack in #Sweden last night. RT because the fake news MSM wont report it! #swedenincident pic.twitter.com/EMh1FmsFac

— Liora Yukla (@LiogaYukla) February 19, 2017

On Sunday, Trump “explained” via Twitter that his statement was in reference to a Fox News segment that claimed that immigration has led to a dramatic increase in crime in Sweden. But today, Swedish police officers who were interviewed in the segment called Ami Horowitz, the man who interviewed them, a “madman” and said that they answered completely different questions than what Fox aired.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: February 20, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Despite shining a light on a country that hasn’t traditionally been well-known for its soccer performance on the world stage, the players on the U.S. women’s national soccer team still aren’t receiving the recognition they deserve. The Women’s World Cup and Olympic Gold Medal champs have been a source of pride for the U.S. Soccer Federation, but now the team’s top players are bringing attention to the fact that they’re still being paid less than their male counterparts, despite outperforming them.

Five of the team’s top players: goalkeeper Hope Solo, forward Alex Morgan, midfielder Megan Rapinoe, and co-captains Carli Lloyd and Becki Sauerbrunn, filed a federal complaint on Thursday with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against the U.S. Soccer Federation, alleging wage discrimination.

In the complaint, the players point out that the Women’s National Team is projected to bring in a net profit of $5 million for U.S. Soccer while the Men’s National Team is actually projected to bring a net loss of $1 million. Meanwhile, they receive less compensation for Friendlies, the World Cup, and sponsored appearances compared to the men’s team. The complaint alleges:

There are no legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for this gross disparity of wages, nor can it be explained away by any bona fide seniority, merit or incentive system or any other factor other than sex.

In an interview with ESPN, the teammates spoke up on the filing, saying that they resorted to legal action after having several conversations with U.S. Soccer that were ineffective. They also said that while only the five of them were listed on the complaint, they were representing the entire women’s team in their fight.

U.S. Soccer responded Thursday, emphasizing their commitment to women’s soccer but claiming that they would not engage in negotiations until the current collective bargaining agreement (CBA) expired at the end of this year. The U.S. Soccer president Sunil Gulati also claimed that the women’s team does not generate as much revenue as the men’s team and that revenue generation must be part of the equation.

US Soccer statement re: today’s developments related to #uswnt. pic.twitter.com/pqk1GinTCB

— Jeff Carlisle (@JeffreyCarlisle) March 31, 2016

For now, the players will need to wait for a response from the EEOC to see if U.S. Soccer violated any laws. This fight goes beyond the actual legal complaint, however, as the players want their actions to send a broader message regarding gender equality. When asked what they hope to achieve with this complaint, the players cited equality, respect, equal pay, and opportunities for younger girls. If the EEOC sides with the team, this could set a significant precedent for female athletes and make a statement regarding equality and equal pay on a broader level.

Mariam Jaffery

Mariam was an Executive Assistant at Law Street Media and a native of Northern Virginia. She has a B.A. in International Affairs with a minor in Business Administration from George Washington University. Contact Mariam at mjaffery@lawstreetmedia.com.

The post Top Stars on U.S. Women’s Soccer Step Up Their Fight For Wage Equality appeared first on Law Street.

Raymond Moore, CEO of the BNP Paribas Open, left his post this week after he stated that women’s tennis “rides on the coat-tails” of the men’s game and that female players “should get down on their knees” in gratitude for famous male players who have, in his eyes, kept the sport afloat.

Moore’s comments angered tennis players from around the world but even though his immediate removal from his post suggests that the tennis community will not stand for this kind of blatant sexism, there has been a surprising wave of agreement with Moore’s comments.

Famed tennis star Novak Djokovic has claimed that male tennis players should be awarded more prize money at competitions because men attract more spectators. He went on to say that:

[Women’s] bodies–and their bodies are much different than men’s bodies–they have to go through a lot of different things that we don’t have to go through. You know, the hormones and different stuff–we don’t need to go into details. Ladies know what I’m talking about. Really, great admiration and respect for them to be able to fight on such a high level.

Djokovic also said that women have to make “sacrifices for certain periods of time, the family time or decisions that they make on their own bodies in order to play tennis.” Although Djokovic was clearly fumbling to reform his comment into a statement that respected women, the mere concept that women are too “hormonal” to compete on the same level as men and that they should set aside time for family life that male athletes should not is not a compliment nor a mark of respect.

Serena Williams responded to Djokovic’s comment, saying that: “Novak is entitled to his opinion but if he has a daughter–I think he has a son right now–he should talk to her and tell her how his son deserves more money because he is a boy.” Djokovic could have made a simple statistical argument about prize money–tournaments that attract more spectators in person and are viewed more on television should have a bigger prize at the end–but by choosing to make the discussion about female bodies and “hormones,” he has stepped firmly into the camp of sexism.

It is never acceptable to suggest that women deserve to be making less in their chosen place of work, but the insult is especially galling in a field where women have historically been excluded because their bodies were considered too weak to play. Female competitors spent centuries being labeled “enthusiasts” rather than athletes. We are lucky enough to have hundreds of strong female athletes in sports across the world who demonstrate that women are capable of incredible athleticism–but consider that the Olympics only began accepting female athletes in 1900,  the U.S. Women’s Open only began in 1946, the FIFA Women’s World Cup only began in 1991, and the Women’s National Basketball Association was only formed in 1996.

Gender parity is not alive and well in the sporting world, even at the highest tier, where men should respect the women who worked the same long, draining hours they did to become champions. Professional athletes and organizers who participate in tournaments such as the BNP Paribas Open are not ignorant of the training athletes of both genders have to go through in order to become the best in their sport. Less than fifty years ago, Billie Jean King and the other founders of the Women’s Tennis Association had to fight to receive equal pay–male tennis players told them that “No one is going to ever pay to watch you birds play.”

Modern women’s tennis is a testament to the work of King and her contemporaries, as millions of viewers tune in to women’s matches, attend the matches in person ,and follow the careers of female athletes. Yet after comments like those of Djokovic and Moore, it would seem that little movement has occurred since the 1970s.

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post A Lesson in Sexism: Moore and Djokovic Trivialize Women in Tennis appeared first on Law Street.

We’ve all heard about the pay gap between men and women, but it seems that one specific statistic is used to illustrate this issue. Proponents of new equal pay laws claim that women make “77 cents for every dollar a man makes.” It’s a number that has been passed around for years by feminist groups, political organizations, and even many prominent politicians. Even President Obama used the “77 cents to a dollar” claim in his 2014 State of the Union address as an example of injustice against women.

Today, women make up about half our workforce. But they still make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. That is wrong, and in 2014, it’s an embarrassment.

-President Obama, 2014 State of the Union address

While that statistic is accurate, further analysis indicates that it may not be the best way to capture the issue at hand. The available evidence suggests that there is a notable wage gap, but that evidence also suggests that the cause of the gap is due to a wide range of factors, which must be taken into account when talking about wage disparities.

Where does this “77 cents” statistic come from and to what extent is wage discrimination a problem for women in the workforce?

The Statistics

You get the 77 cents claim when you take the median, full-time, year-round wage for men and compare it to that of women using data from the census. While accurate based on that calculation, it may also be misleading. The statistic does not take into consideration differences in skills, education level, relevant experience, benefits, hours worked, or even occupation. According to the Washington Post, comparing wages based on weekly earnings narrows the gap to 19 cents and when you look at hourly wages the gap is 14 cents, but those measures also have drawbacks.

The variance between different wage gap estimates generally comes from how these statistics are gathered. Each survey and calculation use different methodologies and it’s very difficult to determine objectively how and if discrimination plays a role in wage differences.

So what’s the pay difference when you take all these into consideration? What other factors may also cause this gap?

Causes:

Hours and Family Care

According to the Center for American Progress, women work on average 35 minutes per day fewer than men. While this most likely will not have an impact on employees who are salaried, that difference will have a notable effect on workers receiving an hourly wage.

According to a Harvard Business Review Study, 43 percent of women with children leave the workforce at some point. There are many reasons why women drop out of the workforce after having children–unpaid maternity leave causes many women to leave their jobs to raise their children due to high childcare costs and time constraints. The statistics also show that once women leave the workforce, many never return. Of those who stop working, only three-quarters of them will eventually start again, and less than half will resume full-time jobs. Because many women don’t return to work in the same capacity as they left, their wages and experience levels are typically lower once they re-enter. Available evidence suggests that having children disproportionately affects women’s careers relative to their husbands. BLS data shows that women who are not married have a much smaller wage gap–earning 95 cents for every dollar a man makes.

Education and Occupations

Men and women also choose different career paths, which often can result in large income differences. In 2013, Georgetown University conducted a survey on the average wage by college major. The study found that nine of the ten best-paying majors were mostly chosen by men:

1. Petroleum Engineering: 87 percent male
2. Pharmacy Pharmaceutical Sciences and Administration: 48 percent male
3. Mathematics and Computer Science: 67 percent male
4. Aerospace Engineering: 88 percent male
5. Chemical Engineering: 72 percent male
6. Electrical Engineering: 89 percent male
7. Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering: 97 percent male
8. Mechanical Engineering: 90 percent male
9. Metallurgical Engineering: 83 percent male
10. Mining and Mineral Engineering: 90 percent male

On the other hand, nine out of ten of the lowest paying majors were dominated by women:

1. Counseling Psychology: 74 percent female
2. Early Childhood Education: 97 percent female
3. Theology and Religious Vocations: 34 percent female
4. Human Services and Community Organization: 81 percent female
5. Social Work: 88 percent female
6. Drama and Theater Arts: 60 percent female
7. Studio Arts: 66 percent female
8. Communication Disorders Sciences and Services: 94 percent female
9. Visual and Performing Arts: 77 percent female
10. Health and Medical Preparatory Programs: 55 percent female

These numbers show that women generally prefer careers that help serve the community or require a level of artistic ability. Men, on the other hand, are more likely to enter a field that involves engineering and manufacturing development. This may be the biggest factor for wage differences, as a community organizer would not make the same as a biochemical engineer.

But why are so few women entering these higher paying, male dominated fields? A study by Indiana University Bloomington shows that many women who enter these “sex-segregated” fields experience high levels of stress due to “coworkers doubting their competence,” “low levels of support from coworkers,” and even sexual harassment. Instead of outright wage discrimination–where women are given less money than men for the same work–this study suggests that different biases push women into lower-paying fields.

Women also tend to prefer jobs that have greater benefits (paid maternity leave and more vacation time) even if the pay is lower. According to a report from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, when benefits are included in a worker’s total compensation, the wage gap shrinks to 3.6 percent.

Overall Pay Difference

According to PolitiFact, when every factor is accounted for, the wage gap narrows to 93 to 95 cents per dollar. This does not indicate equal pay, but it also shows that 77 cent statistic can be overly simplistic. The evidence suggests that outright discrimination has decreased over the years, but it still exists and certain factors disproportionately affect women in the workforce. According to a survey by Glamour magazine, only 39 percent of women asked for a higher pay when starting a new job versus 54 percent of men.

But there is also a large chance that wage differences may be due to discrimination. For example, women may be denied raises or promotions over their male coworkers. According to a Gallup survey, 15 percent of women feel that they were wrongfully denied a promotion because of their gender.

There are other things to consider as well. Raising the tipped minimum wage would greatly benefit women as they make up 2/3 of tip workers. Pay transparency would allow women to discuss their pay with their co-workers, making it easier to identify pay discrimination. Paid and longer maternity leave would also encourage mothers to re-enter the workforce in stronger numbers.

Conclusion

It’s incredibly difficult to determine the exact size of the gender wage gap and the extent to which discrimination plays a role. Because each study uses different calculations, there are often significant disparities in gap estimates. But nearly all reliable and credible surveys do show there is some level of wage discrimination between men and women–whether it is 5 percent or 22 percent. Even if the gap is only one percent, that’s still an injustice.

Resources

Primary

Gallup: In U.S., 15 percent of Women Feel Unfairly Denied a Promotion

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis: Gender Wage Gap May be Much Smaller than Most Think

Georgetown University: The Economic Value of College Majors

Additional

Wall Street Journal: Washington’s Equal Pay Obsession

ARI.org: February 20 is White House Equal Pay Day

Washington Examiner: The ’77 Cents for Every Dollar’ Lie

Washington Post: The White House’s Own Wage Gender Gap

 FactCheck.org: Playing Politics with the Pay Gap

Washington Post: President Obama’s Persistent ’77-cent’ Claim on the Wage Gap Gets a New Pinocchio Rating

Washington Post: The ‘Equal Pay Day’ Factoid that Women Make 78 Cents For Every Dollar Earned by Men

TechRepublic: TechRepublic has Just Published its 2010 IT Skills and Salary Report

 Center for American Progress: Explaining the Gender Wage Gap

The Atlantic: Why 43 percent of Women With Children Leave Their Jobs

Medical Daily: Women Working In Male-Dominated Jobs Experience Higher Levels Of Stress And Health Problems

Mike Stankiewicz

Mike Stankiewicz came to Washington to follow his dream of becoming a journalist. The native New Yorker studied Broadcast Journalism and Law and Society at American University. In his leisure time he enjoys baseball, hiking, and classic American literature. Contact Mike at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Seventy-Seven Cents: The Statistics on Wage Discrimination appeared first on Law Street.

People cite it all the time: women make 77 cents to every dollar men make. We use it as a linchpin in arguments about equal pay, feminism, glass ceilings. We offer it up as proof–because mind-bogglingly, we still need to “prove it”–that feminism is a necessary thing.

But the whole 77 cent thing? Not actually true.

Because that statistic is assuming that the default status is whiteness. But really, Black women make 64 cents to every white man’s dollar. Latina women, 53 cents. Native American women, 60 cents. Similarly, women with dis/abilities (race wasn’t specified, as far as I could find) make 67 cents to men without dis/abilities’ dollar, and 87 cents to what men with dis/abilities earn. Queer women? Especially queer and trans women of color? Similar story.

But even that, even complicating the wage gap narrative we offer as “concrete proof” that sexism is, you know, a thing, is not enough. Because sexism at work manifests in way, way more than just pay differentials. It’s more than straight-up (pun intended) discrimination.

Workplace culture is a massive part of the misogyny of the job market (in so many more ways than I have space to discuss here). As Anne-Marie Slaughter, president of the New America Foundation, wrote in 2012 for The Atlantic:

The culture of “time macho”—a relentless competition to work harder, stay later, pull more all-nighters, travel around the world and bill the extra hours that the international date line affords you—remains astonishingly prevalent among professionals today. Nothing captures the belief that more time equals more value better than the cult of billable hours afflicting large law firms across the country and providing exactly the wrong incentives for employees who hope to integrate work and family.

But let’s even put aside “family” for a moment–because some women wanting (or needing) time with their families (implication: their kids) isn’t the only reason that “time macho,” as Slaughter calls it, is a misogynist expectation.

“Time macho” is misogynist because it places value on a kind of masculinized “endurance” that is simply unhealthy: the burden of being first in the office in the morning and last to leave at night disproportionately falls on women of color, queer women, women with dis/abilities (and combinations thereof) because we have more to “prove” in this society.

“Time macho” is misogynist because it defines “production” as the primary value while feminizing self-care as weak, as less “tough,” as less competitive. It places short term over long term, and it promotes disdain for those of us who try to take care of ourselves.

“Time macho” is misogynist because it is yet another way that women are not permitted to say “no” without consequences: the rape culture of the working world, “time macho” creates workplace cultures in which women have to say yes to the extra night shift, to the additional project, to the seven-day work weeks in unhealthy and unsafe environments, to the 10:00 PM conference call.

Because if we don’t, we know there are plenty of men (or other token women) waiting in the wings to get paid more than we get paid to do the same thing we do; plenty of men (and women, because we get sucked into this, too) waiting to give us less-than-stellar recommendations about us being “not a great fit” in the office, being “disagreeable” or “confrontational” because no, nope, actually, my health is more important than your misogynist expectations.

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post “Time Macho” is the Rape Culture of the Workplace appeared first on Law Street.

At this year’s Academy Awards broadcast, winners and presenters called our attention to more than one political issue, including racial equality and gay rights. (If you say you weren’t tearing up after Graham Moore’s speech you are LYING.) One of the most memorable moments, and one of the first, was Patricia Arquette’s call to action:

To every woman who gave birth to every taxpayer and citizen of this nation we have fought for everybody’s equal rights. It is our time to have wage equality once and for all and equal rights for women in the United States of America.

As you can imagine, my reaction–and that of many others–was “YEAH! YOU GO GIRL!” I mean, anything that makes the great Meryl Streep react like this is truly amazing.

Yes. Everyone pretty much agreed that it was a fantastic acceptance speech.

However, after the show in the press room, Arquette expanded her speech, and with it ended up rubbing some people the wrong way.

So the truth is, even though we sort of feel like we have equal rights in America, right under the surface, there are huge issues that are applied that really do affect women. And it’s time for all the women in America and all the men that love women, and all the gay people, and all the people of color that we’ve all fought for to fight for us now.

What quite a few people are pointing out is that “all the gay people” and “all the people of color” still don’t have equal rights either, yet Arquette called them out to fight for women.

People of color and gays, it seems we owe Patricia Arquette for “fighting for us.” Did anyone capture any footage of said fight?

— jamilah (@JamilahLemieux) February 23, 2015

when you wake up in the morning and find out what else patricia arquette said pic.twitter.com/Edu5dUWXR4 — Anne T. Donahue (@annetdonahue) February 23, 2015

stop cheering for #PatriciaArquette, the feminism she advocates isn’t intersectional and that in itself is really rude

— Jocelyn Jones (@j_abriaaa) February 23, 2015

Maddening that even in a speech that screamed “pay attention to women!” some women are overlooked. http://t.co/5xkzzo7P74 — Latoya Peterson (@LatoyaPeterson) February 23, 2015

After the backlash, Arquette came back with responses on Twitter to try and explain her speech.

Wage equality will help ALL women of all races in America. It will also help their children and society.

— Patricia Arquette (@PattyArquette) February 23, 2015

I have long been an advocate for the rights of the #LBGT community. The question is why aren’t you an advocate for equality for ALL women? — Patricia Arquette (@PattyArquette) February 23, 2015

Clearly what we have here is a case of a well-intentioned woman expressing herself the wrong way. Taken at face value, her speech in the Oscar press room truly does alienate women of the LGBT and racial minority communities. In my opinion, she meant to convey the fact that equal rights for all women will affect these communities as well. Equal pay is just one topic in the broader spectrum of equal rights, but you have to start somewhere.

So, should her original, Meryl-Streep-cheered-for-it speech be ignored because she didn’t explain herself well enough? Definitely not. If anything, her comments should incite more action in women–and men–of every race and orientation.

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Patricia Arquette Under Fire Over Oscar Speech appeared first on Law Street.

Did you watch President Obama make the Republicans cry Tuesday night?

Yeah you did! Because you’re smart and well informed and give a crap about where this nation is headed, am I right?

Obviously.

So today, instead of reacting to the SOTU—because let’s be real, you’ve read a thousand of those pieces by now already—we’re going to talk about something a little less official. A little more ridiculous. A little more—Meninist.

Yep, that’s right. Meninist is a word now. Thanks, Men.

But who is a Meninist, you ask, and what in fuck’s name is Meninism? Sadly, it’s not an adjective used to describe a person who is both a zealous believer in Leninism and also suffering from meningitis.

I love the word #meninist. It cleverly combines the painful brain inflammation of “meningitis” with the doomed zeal of “Leninist”.

— Tom Freeman (@SnoozeInBrief) January 17, 2015

We’re sorry, Tom Freeman. We like your definition a whole lot better.

Nope. In fact, Meninism is a sad little play on Feminism, because those goddamn men’s rights activists are so fucking convinced that their lives are super hard and women are out to get them.

All together now.

UGGHHH.

So basically, the Meninist movement has gone something like this, so far.

Men started tweeting at each other with a cute little Meninist hashtag. It started out as a joke (rolling my eyes so hard right now), and then morphed into an outlet where people with penises could bitch about how hard it is to be a man in the twenty-first century.

The first challenge, it seems, is spelling. #MeninistTwitter and #MenimistTwitter are used interchangeably across this little trend, which I think is probably the funniest detail about this whole thing.

Anyway! After these dick-swingers had built up something of a Twitter community, some entrepreneurial folks decided to capitalize on this jackassery and make some merch.

Courtesy of Teespring.com.

And so was born the Meninist T-shirt and hoodie combo. Douche canoes galore are modeling their swag proudly on Twitter.

Look what came in the mail #Meninism #meninist pic.twitter.com/cCJGMgDMzZ

— Evan Conway (@evandotconway) January 15, 2015

And some of them are even totally not-ironic women! Because men need equal rights too, guys. It’s just so unfair that they get to make more money than women do, spend less on their cost of living (having a vagina is expensive, yo), participate less in childrearing and other household tasks, and control the vast majority of corporate and governing bodies across the globe.

Supporting equal rights @MeninistTweet #meninist pic.twitter.com/ZBqssfyFXG

— Paige (@tubapay) January 16, 2015

So much power, so little justice.

Folks, I can’t. And apparently, neither can a lot of you! Because some wonderful feminists also took to Twitter to mock and ridicule these Meninist fuckers, because COME ON. This shit is ridiculous.

Fixed the meninist tshirt guys pic.twitter.com/JgM3LT1dUP

— Emily ReyNOlds (@rey_z) January 19, 2015

the "I'm never getting laid" starter pack: pic.twitter.com/dfQXxhfbDw

— Kuh-Reem (@WTFKAREEM) January 17, 2015

noticed a little typo in the new #meninist hoodies, so i thought i'd help out! pic.twitter.com/7E4NuEdC1b

— Inglourious Beanpole (@ladyepicenter) January 17, 2015

You folks are heroes.

But, all jokes aside, this Meninist crap is genuinely not okay, and here’s why.

A feminist is, by definition, “a person who believes in the social, political and economic equality of the sexes.” Thanks for defining this baggage-laden, complicated term in such a straightforward way, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie! We love you.

So, here’s the thing. If you’re not a feminist—or, if you’re like these Meninist jerks who are actively taking a stand against feminism—that means that you don’t believe in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.

Got that?

You’re cheering for inequality and oppression. That’s what you’re fighting for. That’s really fucking shitty, guys.

Now, to be fair, a lot of these Meninists don’t seem to be holding up signs telling women to get back in the kitchen. (Although a fair amount of them are pissed off that we don’t want to see their dicks.) They aren’t actively calling for the vag-havers to be oppressed. Instead, they’re just looking for some sympathy.

These seemingly reasonable Meninists are simply saying that equality between the sexes has already been achieved, and so feminism has become obsolete. Anyone who STILL identifies as a feminist is actually a man-hater, looking to reach beyond simple gender equality and over toward flipping the power dynamic, leaving men in the oppressed position that women used to be in before we got equal rights and all.

To those Meninists, I say, UNTRUE.

Gender equality has not been achieved. This is not a real thing.

Women are still paid less on average than their male counterparts. Women are still disproportionately at the mercy of domestic and sexual violence, which (not coincidentally) are crimes that are disproportionately committed by men. Women are still responsible for a greater share of the household and childrearing responsibilities. Women are still more likely to live in poverty, more likely to have difficulty accessing quality health care, and more likely to be single parents.

Why are all of these things happening?

In part, it’s because of shitty legislation. The Equal Rights Amendment never passed, meaning that it’s still legal to deny or abridge the legal rights of women simply because they have vaginas. There are also a shit ton of laws out there that specifically bar us from maintaining control over our own bodies or accessing the health care we need.

These are the problems that are officially on the books.

But off the books? We’re in trouble there too.

As a culture, women are almost exclusively valued as objects, not people. We’re treated like ornaments to be admired, fetus incubators to be legislated, pieces of ass to be fucked. When compared to men, women are literally paid less and raped more—and that’s because we aren’t valued as highly as men are.

So, to all the Meninists complaining about how fucking hard it is to be a man in the twenty-first century:

You’re missing the point.

Feminism isn’t about making life hard for you, and if you think it is, then you’re acting like a self-involved brat. Please wake the fuck up.

Women want to be valued and respected. We want to live in a world where social, political, and economic equality is a real thing.

And we want you to stop whining about it and get the fuck out of our way.

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Misogynists Are At it Again, Now With T-Shirts! appeared first on Law Street.

President Obama gave his second-to-last State of the Union address last night, and it’s being lauded as a great one. He laid out a long to-do list, including addressing net neutrality, his education plan, a minimum wage hike, a tax code overhaul, and a fight against ISIS, despite the fact that he enters this year having to stand against a Republican-controlled Congress. In fact, much of the speech seemed like a challenge to a Congress made up of the very people who have consistently tried to stall Obama’s polices for the last seven years. Whether or not they decide to play nice will be up to the Republicans.

The Republican response to the speech, of course, was rather negative. The main criticism seemed to be that Obama didn’t focus enough on the middle class. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), who actually gave the Republican response to last year’s SOTU, commented:

You know, I was disappointed. I was disappointed that I didn’t hear more from the president as far as how we were going to help those middle-class families. I thought he painted a little rosy picture of how things are, at a time when people continue to see their wages actually shrink, take-home pay shrinking. Job opportunities are not enough.

That quote from McMorris Rodgers is pretty consistent with a lot of GOP responses to Obama’s SOTU speech last night–that he doesn’t understand the middle class and do enough to help the citizens who fall into that bracket. Most Democrats are insisting that the plans that Obama laid out–particularly those to give middle class families a tax break, as well as help ease the burden of college payments, are going to be great for these segment of the country.

As I sat here trying to work my way through all of the plans, all of the political rhetoric, all of the buzzwords that got thrown around last night, I had a realization. It’s not just that Democrats and Republicans can’t seem to agree on how to help the middle class. It might be that we can’t agree on what the “middle class” is. 

It sounds silly–we all know what the middle class is, right? It must be that chunk of the population between those in poverty, and those who live in mansions. Is it blue-collar workers, or white-collar workers, or a little bit of both? Or is it more of a heritage–are we middle class because of the values that are instilled in us? I honestly don’t know anymore.

What I do know is that pretty much everyone thinks they’re middle class. In a 2012 Gallup Poll, 42 percent of respondents said they were middle class. Another 13 percent said they were upper-middle class. Then another 31 percent said they were “working class,” which makes this entire thing even less clear, given that working class is sometimes viewed as middle class. Most importantly, there were a plurality of people in every income bracket from $30,000-$100,000 who defined themselves as “middle class.”

The concept of the middle class has long been hailed as a bedrock of American society, and I’m not saying that’s a bad thing. But I think it does make it incredibly difficult to design policies for the “middle class” because when you’re talking about well over half the population, one size doesn’t even fit most. What I, as a 20-something living in Washington D.C., need, is significantly different than what a family in Iowa needs, which is different than someone about to retire in California needs, even if we all make about the same amount and identify as “middle class.”

To bring this back to last night’s speech, it’s that very definition problem that makes it easy for both the Democrats and the Republicans to point to their plans and say “look, it’s for the middle class.” For example, Obama’s statement last night:

That’s why this Congress still needs to pass a law that makes sure a woman is paid the same as a man for doing the same work. Really. It’s 2015. It’s time.

To me, that sounds like a tangible thing that would help the middle class. Given that it’s now pretty close to the norm for both men and women, even those married and/or with families, to work, ensuring that they both get fair pay seems like it would help the middle class to me. But then the Republicans see that Obama is also proposing a tax hike on the richest Americans, and will argue that that’s going to slow job growth, so paying men and women equally isn’t helpful if neither of them can find a job. It’s a messy, cyclical argument that’s more about politics than actually trying to help the middle class, no matter who we may be. And that’s a shame.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post SOTU All About the Middle Class, But Who Exactly is That? appeared first on Law Street.

You guys, I’m getting really fed up with the GOP.

This week, Senate Republicans voted unanimously to block the Paycheck Fairness Act, a bill aimed at closing the gender wage gap.

It would have encouraged salary transparency among employees, protected workers who share salary information with one another, imposed more serious penalties for pay discrimination, and required employers to prove that any existing wage gaps are in place for reasons other than gender.

Basically, the Paycheck Fairness Act is exactly what it sounds like — a bill that seeks fair paychecks for everyone, regardless of gender.

You’d think that’d be a pretty standard, reasonable goal: pay everyone fairly based on the work that they do, not on the genitals they have! Easy enough, right? Well, apparently not. Because this is the fourth time that Republicans have blocked it.

It’s a pretty counter-intuitive move, considering that just a few weeks ago, the Republican National Committee claimed that, “All Republicans support equal pay.” It appears that these Senate Republicans are voting against the official party line.

This #LaborDay, the White House & Democrats believe paying women less than men is an acceptable practice. pic.twitter.com/AhCYH5RGgR

— RNC (@GOP) September 1, 2014

Not to mention, earlier this month, Politico leaked that the GOP was sorely lacking in support from single women, and would be targeting the Beyoncé-voters’ bloc come election season. Senate Republicans didn’t seem to get that memo, since their actions this week are only further alienating the key voting demographic they need to win over.

The Paycheck Fairness Act is a direct response to the realities of gender discrimination in the workplace — women earn an average of 77 cents to a man’s dollar. That statistic hasn’t changed in a decade. And while it’s true that it’s a fairly complex number, determined by a variety of factors, it’s still very real that the average female worker earns less than her male counterparts.

And Republicans are voting to keep it that way.

Women are paid less than men from the minute they enter the workforce right through to the moment they get promoted to the executive corner office. There are a ton of factors that go into the wage gap — industry, tenure, marital status, and education level, just to name a few — but women are getting paid less no matter which of these variables get thrown into the mix.

Passing the Paycheck Fairness Act would send a clear message that the federal government cares about women in the workforce. This bill would not only take real steps toward closing the pay gap between men and women, it would also communicate that female workers are valued. The way they’re treated, and how much they’re paid, matters.

But Republicans are voting to hang on to current practices, like salary secrecy, that work to keep women’s paychecks smaller and their professional contributions undervalued. Why? According to the Senators, they worry that the bill would cause employers to stop hiring female employees, fearful of discrimination lawsuits. They’ve also argued that the wage gap is exaggerated and that women are already protected from discrimination enough.

So basically, the Republican Senators who blocked the Paycheck Fairness Act on Monday night are sending a number of shitbag messages:

They’re dismissing the very real problem of pay discrimination, invalidating the experiences of women who are forced to support themselves on inadequate wages simply because they have vaginas.

They’re telling the world that women are not valuable workers, and that it’s perfectly acceptable for women to work just as hard as — if not harder than — their male counterparts, and get paid less.

They’re upholding a hostile, sexist culture in which, apparently, if employers are expected to treat their female workers in a non-discriminatory manner, they simply won’t hire female workers at all.

And finally, they’re sending a crystal clear message to women across the nation that the GOP does not take our priorities seriously. Instead, they’ll tell us our problems don’t exist, our concerns are invalid and unnecessary, and then vote in favor of policies that harm us.

The RNC’s Twitter account claims to be in support of equal pay for women, but actions speak louder than words.

You’re not fooling anyone, conserva-turds.

—

Hannah R. Winsten (@HannahRWinsten) is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York City. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow.

Featured image courtesy of  [Gage Skidmore via Flickr]

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The GOP Blocked the Paycheck Fairness Act AGAIN appeared first on Law Street.

Monday night I was watching Late Night with Seth Meyers  with the hilarious Bill Hader and Representative Nancy Pelosi as his guests. The House Minority Leader is no stranger to late night television, especially in recent months as she has been interviewed not just by Meyers but also by Stephen Colbert and Bill Maher.

One of the agendas Rep. Pelosi talks about in most interviews is her economic plan for women under the slogan, “When Women Succeed, America Succeeds”. I love this for several reasons, but most of all because we have the most powerful woman in American politics promoting equal rights for all genders. She shows that it is not only possible for women to succeed, but also that once they do, they have the platform to promote women’s rights on a larger scale.

My favorite quote of hers from the night was:

“Whether it’s about respect for women, a woman’s right to choose…equal pay for equal work… whether it’s protecting women from domestic violence, violence in the military, violence on the campus; all of it is about one word, and that is respect. The opposite is disrespect, and that’s what we have to fight.”

Nailed it!

Rep. Pelosi is not the only woman in congress promoting women’s rights, but as the first female Speaker of the House and current leader of Democrats in the House, she certainly has a larger following. According to the Center for American Women and Politics however, in 2014 women hold only 18.5 percent of the seats in Congress.

While 18.5 percent is leagues ahead of where women were 50 years ago, it is not very reflective of the American population. Women make up 51 percent of American citizens, yet we hold less than a fourth of the seats in the national government? No wonder women’s rights continue to simmer on the back burner!

The list of excuses for this imbalance is long and varied. Growing up in a conservative small town, I heard numerous insults thrown at women who dared to go for higher political office. They ranged from “Well, women just aren’t interested in politics” (FALSE) to, “If Hillary Clinton wins, I’ll see you all in Canada!” to “Think about what would happen when Aunt Flow comes to town!”

Yes, because every woman would be so emotionally unbalanced during her period days that she would no doubt get mad at some country for a minor slight and end up starting a war.

As silly as some of these sound, they reflect a long-running and deep-set opinion that women are somehow unfit to hold public office. We still see the disconnect between male leaders being “powerful” or “strict” to female leaders being “bitchy” or “emotional.” As Rep. Pelosi so sagely put: “All of it is about one word, and that is respect.“

Look at it this way. On the Forbes list of most powerful women, American politics are hardly represented. Rep. Pelosi shows up, as she should, along with former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and First Lady Michelle Obama.

Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Courtesy of Shawn via Flickr.

Hillary Rodham Clinton, Courtesy of World Bank Photo Collection/Simone D. McCourtie via Flickr.

First Lady Michelle Obama, Courtesy of Barack Obama/Christopher Dilts for Obama for America via Flickr.

Whether you agree with them or not, all three of these women have been fundamental in promoting women’s health and equality. It should also be noted that all three are part of the Democratic Party. There are definitely women who hold office as conservatives, but in a party notorious for blocking women’s rights, they cannot hope to rise very far.

Many other American women on the list are part of the entertainment, technology, or business industries, and foreign women in politics, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel who ranked number one, outrank American women across the board. Does this show that other countries, especially those in Europe, have a higher respect for women? Absolutely.

Disrespect for female leaders runs deep in American politics, but as those like Pelosi, Clinton, and Obama show, it is possible and necessary for women to keep fighting that disrespect. Our goal should be equality, because without it we will always be considered the lesser sex.

—

Morgan McMurray (@mcflurrybatman) is a freelance copywriter and blogger based in Savannah, Georgia. She spends her time writing, reading, and attempting to dance gracefully. She has also been known to binge-watch Netflix while knitting scarves.

Featured image courtesy of [Nancy Pelosi via Flickr]

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post It’s All About Respect: We Need More Women In Politics appeared first on Law Street.

In case you hadn’t heard from the overwhelming amount of posts dedicated to them, the MTV Video Music Awards happened on Sunday. I, along with millions of other pop-culture followers, tuned in to watch the usual shenanigans of the music industry’s most famous and most notorious. As predicted, there was twerking, flashy costumes, lip-syncing, wardrobe malfunctions, laughter, tears, tripping, and Moonmen. Basically: all the things that forever have me questioning why I watch this nonsense in the first place.

But then, two things of note happened. The first, out of all the unlikely sources, came from the Artist Formerly Known as Hannah Montana.

Yes!

When her name was announced as the winner of Video of the Year (for “Wrecking Ball”, naturally), Miley Cyrus sent up a man named Jesse in her stead. Jesse took out some cards and began speaking. What followed was surprising and heart-wrenching:

“My name is Jesse and I’m accepting this award on behalf of the 1.6 million runaways and homeless youth who are starving, lost, and scared right now. I know this because I am one of these people.”

Visibly nervous, Jesse went on to explain, through constant cheers from the audience, how you could go to Miley’s Facebook page and donate money to help homeless youth in America. I was extremely impressed with this gesture from Miley, as she is now utilizing her substantial fan base to raise awareness and funds for an important cause.

Well done, Miley!

The VMAs were far from done, though. Before the night was through, another celebrity chose to use her VMA performance as a loudspeaker for one of my favorite subjects: feminism. Enter Beyonce.

Courtesy of beyoncegifs.tumblr.com

 Like every Beyonce performance ever, she had intense dance moves, sparkly costumes, and so-so vocals. But her music is not why we are here. No, THIS is why we are here:

Courtesy of beyoncegifs.tumblr.com

In a world where feminism is still (somehow) misunderstood, one of the most popular musicians of our generation declared herself a feminist. That’s not all. Before lighting up “FEMINIST” in big letters, we heard the words of Nigerian author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie:

“We teach girls to shrink themselves, to make themselves smaller. We say to girls, you can have ambition, but not too much. You should aim to be successful, but not too successful. Otherwise, you would threaten the man…Feminist: a person who believes in the social, political, economic equality of the sexes.”

If you haven’t already, listen to the rest of this woman’s wise words. The entire speech can be watched here. Go ahead, watch. I’ll wait.

Done? Good.

So Beyonce not only declared herself a feminist, she defined what feminism truly is and did it in front of millions of viewers. I gave her a standing ovation right in my living room. Yet, in spite of all the truth she used her performance to convey, she is still getting negative feedback:

If Beyoncé is a feminist then I think it’s a very cheap and easy sort of feminism she’s flogging. Not really my thing.

— Billy Lunn (@billysubway) August 25, 2014

If Beyoncé has taught us anything, it’s that strip clubs need 10′ tall “FEMINIST” signs

— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) August 26, 2014

Beyoncé, you’re not a feminist. You sing the lyrics “If you liked it then you should have put a ring on it”. That’s the opposite of feminism — Ryan Travers (@ryantravers) August 25, 2014

I couldn’t hear Beyonce’s #feminist statement @ #VMAs over the thong & glittered ass dance ensemble behind her. #ILikeBigButtsAnICannotLie

— Su Castillo (@snarkyzebra) August 27, 2014

Thanks to @Beyonce I learned tonight that requiring female back-up dancers to dry hump everything in sight is #Feminism. Empowering! #VMA

— Derek Hunter (@derekahunter) August 25, 2014

why can’t Beyoncé make her mind between feminism and female objectification though — Matt Gehring (@mattygehrbear) August 25, 2014

See anything wrong with these? You should. All of them perpetuate a view that someone can somehow demonstrate “incorrect” feminism or that they aren’t “feminist enough.” Really? When feminism’s definition was literally spelled out in front of you?

Just because someone dresses sexy, dances provocatively, or strips on a stripper pole does not mean they can’t be a feminist. Just because a woman is a stay-at-home mom, a Christian, or happily married, does not mean she can’t be a feminist. Feminism does not just encompass all women, it encompasses all people from all walks of life.

If you believe women should be given equal salaries to men in the same field: that’s a feminist ideal. If you believe a woman can be whatever she wants to be, like the President of the United States, or an exotic dancer, or a soccer mom: that’s a feminist ideal. If you think women are objectified in media and entertainment, so do feminists.

“Feminist: a person who believes in the social, political, economic equality of the sexes.”

How much clearer can you get? Beyonce performing sexually suggestive routines and songs does not mean she cannot call herself a feminist. Anyone who says otherwise is drawing attention away from the fact that she used her considerable influence to get across a feminist message. For that, we should applaud her. Luckily, most everywhere you look, praise for her VMA performance far outweighs the ridicule and misunderstanding. There is hope for humanity yet!

If nothing else, what should come out of both Beyonce’s and Miley’s demonstrations at this year’s VMAs are more celebrities supporting good causes. When they have such large followings, why wouldn’t they? So Beyonce, Miley: you two keep doing you.

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Beyonce’s Feminist Message Receives Praise…And Ridicule? appeared first on Law Street.

Happy graduation week, folks!

My office is right across the street from Radio City Music Hall in New York City, and I’ve been watching NYU’s Class of 2014 swarm the neighborhood all week. To all of our wonderful readers receiving diplomas — congratulations! You fuckin’ did it.

It’s been an eventful week, what with Michigan passing this craptastic rape insurance bill (excuse me while I barf all over my keyboard), and the backlash around Shailene Woodley’s not-a-feminist comment still swirling. Plus, the internet is filled with awesome commencement speeches. We’re looking at you, Sandra Bullock and Charlie Day.

Basically, this has been a week where we’re all looking ahead to the future. And so, we’re going to take a moment here and talk about the future of feminism.

SPOILER ALERT: It doesn’t just include the vagina-bearing likes of Shailene Woodley. Nope. It also includes men.

So, dudes of the world, here’s why feminism isn’t just for the ladies. It’s a fairly big deal for you too.

Let’s start by saying that, unless you’re a close-minded, neanderthal jerk, you believe in social, political, and economic equality between the sexes. If you DON’T believe in said equality — i.e., you’re a big fan of women being treated as inferior and subservient to men — then you are gigantic douchebag and I advise you to reform your troubled ways immediately.

Seriously, guys. We’re calling it like we see it. You’re not old-fashioned or traditional. You’re just a jerk. Get it together, would you please?

Thanks. Now, for the vast majority of you wonderful, well-intentioned, equality-minded men, listen up. I’ve met a lot of you who don’t actively identify as feminists. You’ve told me that it seems like a women’s club that you don’t really have a place in. Not to mention, you don’t entirely get it. Sure, ladies should be getting equal pay and all that, but we’re not the only ones who are suffering in this gender-biased society. Men get kind of a crap deal too.

Yes. Yes you do. And that’s why feminism needs you.

See, feminism isn’t just about securing safe and affordable access to abortion services, or raising a woman’s 77 cents to match a man’s dollar. Those are important aspects of the feminist cause, for sure, but they’re just the tip of the iceberg.

As a whole, feminism is about creating a more open and egalitarian society. As feminists, we’re fed up with gender roles that position women as sex objects and men as commodified breadwinners. We’re tired of values that expect women to cook and clean and men to pay all the bills. We’re sick of being told to “act like a lady” — to look pretty and keep our mouths and legs shut. We’re equally sick of being told to “be a man,” to be emotionless and aggressive to prove your masculinity.

Feminism is about achieving social, political, and economic equality for women — yes — because that’s something we still don’t have.

But it’s also about destroying the gender binary that’s currently ingrained in our society. It’s harmful to men, women, transfolks, genderqueers, and everyone in between. We’re all expected to play roles that don’t quite fit, to prove ourselves and our identities over and over again, to punish ourselves with shame when we fail to measure up.

We’re all left with a constant and nagging feeling of insecurity in our selves — in our worth as human beings — when we feel the need to qualify our desires, our actions, and our feelings with disclaimers like “no homo” and “man up.”

And all of us deserve to feel totally secure in our wants and needs, to feel completely comfortable in our skin, to be entirely at ease with our individuality.

Feminism wants that to happen. We’re working to make our relationships with each other less about power struggle and arbitrary expectations, and more about mutual respect and genuine human connection. And even more importantly, we’d like to make our relationships with ourselves less about shame and insecurity, and more about radical acceptance and self-love.

I feel like that’s a cause we can all get behind, can’t we?

So while you’re getting inspired by all the commencement speeches that are going viral this week, think about the future you want to help create. If it’s one where we break down this dysfunctional gender binary that’s holding us all back, then you’re a feminist.

Own it, menfolk. You’ll be making the world a better place.

And, bonus points – nothing’s sexier than a feminist man. Just ask Feminist Frank. (Seriously, feminist men, we love the shit out of you.)

—

Hannah R. Winsten (@HannahRWinsten) is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York City. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow.

Featured image courtesy of [Toban Black via Flickr]

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dear Men: Feminism Makes You Sexy appeared first on Law Street.