Saudi Arabia marked the week following International Women’s Day with a historic event–the country’s first ever girls’ council, convened in the province of Qassim. The council is a small part of the sweeping Vision 2030 plan, a set of goals for the kingdom that includes creating a more tolerant and inclusive atmosphere for women. Yet the council has now become a viral joke rather than an important turning point for the country, after photos from the convening of the council revealed that it was entirely comprised of men.

Some women apparently do sit on the council, but the gender segregation codes of Saudi Arabia meant that they had to sit in a separate room, connected to the main conference by video link. In a country where women quite literally cannot get a seat at the table, what can the girls’ council accomplish?

Qassim Governor Prince Faisal bin Mishal bin Saud, who hosted the conference, framed the council as important because “we look at women as sisters to men.” This is far from a rallying cry for gender parity, but it may be the best we can expect from Saudi Arabia. Life for girls and women in the Kingdom is dictated entirely by their male guardians, who are able to control where they go, who they see, and what they do with virtually every moment of their day. Women are not treated as legal adults, which means even as progress slowly trickles into the country, they are still denied basic legal rights and protections.

In the case of Saudi Arabia, it is always wise to temper expectations and remember that the Vision 2030 goals may not actually be reached by 2030. Women’s rights are not the only issue on the table–poverty, youth unemployment, a lack of affordable housing and a clearly defined racial hierarchy that has been reinforced over the years by the wealthiest Saudi families preserving the status quo.

These civil rights issues are inextricably linked to the oil economy, which has concentrated wealth in certain pockets and has left the rest of the country out in the cold. Vision 2030’s mission requires an overhaul of every part of Saudi life–and it may be impossible to successfully implement the changes that must be made unless the government is willing to relax the ties between its extreme interpretation of religion and rule of law.

The Qassim girls’ council has already been turned into a meme, being compared to the photo of an all male Trump Administration team reinstating the Mexico City Policy (also known as the global gag rule) by executive order this year. Western news outlets picked up the images from Qassim, pointing out the absurdity of a girls’ council without any women present. Still, the criticism has not moved the Saudi organizers to change the make-up of the council or let the female advisers participate alongside their male counterparts.

I sincerely hope that the girls’ council does not fade into the background, and that it does receive the necessary funding and attention to advance gender equality. Yet, at this moment, it seems like a mere publicity stunt gone wrong: an attempt to showcase the Vision 2030 goals that revealed exactly how far Saudi Arabia still has to go.

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 Why Saudi Arabia Isn’t Going to Hit its 2030 Goal appeared first on Law Street.

Yesterday we went through the five reasons why people are protesting the Brock Turner’s sentence, the 20-year-old former Stanford swimmer who was sentenced to six months in jail after he sexually assaulted an unconscious woman last year. Now it seems that civilians aren’t the only ones speaking out against the case and rape culture–celebrities are too.

Lena Dunham, who is the creator, writer, and star of the HBO series “Girls,” tweeted out Wednesday a video featuring her and few of her fellow female cast mates discussing sexual assault in dedication to the survivor of the Stanford case.

I dedicate this to the brave survivor in the Stanford case who has given so much to change the conversation. https://t.co/KMOJUxvPu0

— Lena Dunham (@lenadunham) June 8, 2016

In the compelling Now This video, Dunham along with Allison Williams, Jemima Kirke, and Zosia Mamet explained that despite their differences, they are all in agreement when it comes to the issue of sexual assault.

Their message was simple–support, listen, and take action.

In the video, the women also offered the following three statistics on sexual assault:

• One in five women will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime.
• 80 percent of those attacks will be committed by someone they know.
• One in four girls will be sexually abused before the age of 18.

They also didn’t hesitate to recognize their own privilege in the video, stating,

While its just the four of us here right now, we hope to represent the solidarity and support all survivors should be able to find. Which may be the first time that four white women can accurately represent anything.

Following the video’s release, people began using the hashtag #SheIsSomeone on social media to express their support for the Stanford victim, and other victims like her who have suffered from sexual assault as well as victim blaming.

A friendly reminder that sexual assault & rape is wrong because #sheissomeone and we all deserve safety and respect. https://t.co/j4XKxcKzUa

— Kelly Roskam (@KellyEWRoskam) June 9, 2016

People all over the world are coming together to support this girl and it’s amazing. #SheIsSomeone

— Emily (@emilyhawkkins) June 9, 2016

Not because she’s someone’s daughter
Not because she’s someone’s girlfriend
But because #SheIsSomeone

— Tessa (@GonceTessa) June 9, 2016

Dunham, who is an outspoken feminist, has publicly supported many women’s issues in the past, and even created an online feminist newsletter titled Lenny Letter in an effort to continue raising awareness on other issues plaguing women today.

So for all the women out there, I’d like to extend a big “thank you” to the cast of “Girls” for speaking out on this issue and helping to educate more women and men on how they can help support victims of sexual assault.

For more on the Stanford sexual assault case and Brock Turner’s sentencing read our original article here.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Cast of “Girls” Unites to Send Powerful Message About Sexual Assault appeared first on Law Street.

The vast majority of public school classrooms in the United States are composed of students of both genders. While some private schools do occasionally embark on single-sex education, public schools focus on a blend of genders. However, there is growing debate about the effectiveness of each method of education. Read on to learn about single-sex education, its benefits, its problems, and its future.

History of Single-Sex Education

In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, single-sex classrooms in public schools were the norm and a product of cultural views on women and their roles in society. In the latter half of the twentieth century, however, single-sex education was only found in elite private schools and reserved for students whose parents could afford to send their children to expensive preparatory programs. Recently, however, there has been a push to offer single-sex classrooms in the American public school system.

In the mid 1990s, there were only two public schools in the United States that offered single-sex classrooms; today there are more than 500. As education professionals search for innovative ways to improve the education system, many have looked toward single-sex education as a way to capitalize on boys’ and girls’ different learning styles. While various studies and reports proclaiming the merits of a single-sex education, many claim just the opposite.

What are the Arguments for Single-Sex Education?

Advocates claim single-sex education offers students a learning environment that is directed toward their gender’s natural learning style. Research has shown that boys and girls learn differently; where boys often learn better in an environment that emphasizes physical activity and more structure, girls often learn best in a classroom that emphasizes verbal communication and empathy. In a single-sex classroom, a teacher would be better able to focus on those learning styles to enhance the experiences of each gender.

Advocates also argue that a single-sex classroom would help to remove existing gender biases, which some professionals say are pushing girls away from computer technology careers and boys away from the arts. Traditionally, boys excel in math and sciences while girls succeed more in the arts and English. Some argue that single-sex classrooms would allow students to explore all of these areas unhindered by any gender biases that may exist.

Many people point out that removing the distraction of trying to impress the other gender, especially for middle and high school students, would improve student performance. Experts say girls tend to “dumb themselves down” for boys, while boys will often act out or goof off in order to catch the attention of girls. Without the distraction of the opposite gender, some experts say that students will be more focused and serious about their schoolwork.

What are the Arguments Against Single-Sex education?

Opponents of single-sex classrooms point out the similarities between separating genders in education and the “separate but equal” doctrine aimed at African Americans in public schools in the 1950s. They argue that separate but equal education is “inherently unequal.”

To some, single-sex classrooms violate Title IX, a federal educational amendment that requires females to be included in any educational program or activity. Opponents feel that single-sex classrooms would actually reinforce the same gender stereotypes advocates hope to eliminate. The kind of learning environments proposed by advocates of single-sex classrooms cater to existing stereotypes about males and females, and would present problems for students such as, for instance, a sensitive boy or an assertive girl.

Opponents argue that students are not cookie cutter molds of the traits commonly associated with their gender; rather their character varies along a spectrum ranging from loud and physically active to quiet and empathetic. Single-sex classrooms would trap students in rigid stereotypes, failing to allow students who fall anywhere else on the spectrum the chance to grow individually and academically.

Additionally, opponents say the true failure of a single-sex education is that it does not provide opportunities for boys and girls to work together, thus failing to prepare them for a co-educational world. As women anchor their places in American industry and business, today’s students will need to learn how to function with both genders, without being distracted simply because of the presence of the opposite sex.

Case Studies: Examples of Single-Sex Education Across the U.S.

Urban Prep

Located in Chicago, Illinois, Urban Prep Academies is a collection of single-sex all-male public charter schools. They are currently the only all-male public schools in the state of Illinois. The curriculum includes a heavy focus on community and public service, and working toward either college admittance or a professional field. Urban Prep has made reaching out to young men, and teaching in ways that correspond to the way in which young men learn, one of its primary goals.

The success of Urban Prep has been well documented — it certainly has had a higher graduation rate than many of its peers in other public schools in the area. However, there are questions as to whether that comes from the single-sex aspect of education, or the other benefits offered by a charter school like Urban Prep. There’s also the question of whether the model that Urban Prep employs would be sustainable on a wider scale.

William A. Lawson Institute for Peace and Prosperity

The William A. Lawson Institute for Peace and Prosperity (WALIPP), located in Houston, Texas, is an all-male public school. One interesting aspect of WALIPP is that in addition to an all-male student population, the teaching staff is also all men. The reasoning behind such specific hiring is that the teachers act as strong male role models for the young men who are in their classrooms. Many of the young men at WALIPP were raised primarily by their mothers, in single-family households, and benefit from having successful older men to look to for guidance. Audrey Lawson, the founder of WALIPP, explained that: “inner city boys started out not being thought of as good students. In elementary school, they have had mostly women teachers, and girls respond better to them.” 

Conclusion

Whether or not we’ll start to move more convincingly toward single-sex classrooms is uncertain; although it is important to note that as more charter schools try unconventional methods, it is certainly a possibility. The benefits have yet to be proven, but as American students constantly struggle in meeting educational benchmarks, the experiment of single-sex learning may be valuable enough for some schools to consider worth the risk.

Resources

Primary

U.S. Department of Education: Title IX and Sex Discrimination

Additional

Washington Post: Boys and Girls Learn Separately at Prince George’s School

National Association for Single Sex Public Education: What Have Researchers Found When They Compare Single-Sex Education With Co-Education?

Denver Post: Genders Split Up At More Schools

CRC Health Group: The Many Advantages of Single-Sex Schools

ASCD: Single-Gender Classes Can Respond to the Needs of Boys and Girls

Synonym: The Disadvantages of Single Gender Education Schools

Al Jazeera America: Study: Single-Sex Education Offers No Benefits

Atlantic: The Trouble With Single-Sex Schools

American Psychological Association: Single-Sex Education Unlikely to Offer Advantage Over Coed Schools, Research Finds

The New York Times: Single-Sex Education is Assailed in Report

Washington Post: More Schools Trying Separation of the Sexes

Huffington Post: Arlington High School in Indianapolis Separating Boys and Girls in Classes

Great Schools: Single-Sex Education: The Pros and Cons

Atlantic: The Never-Ending Controversy Over All Girls Education

Joseph Palmisano

Joseph Palmisano is a graduate of The College of New Jersey with a degree in History and Education. He has a background in historical preservation, public education, freelance writing, and business. While currently employed as an insurance underwriter, he maintains an interest in environmental and educational reform. Contact Joseph at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post More Public Schools are Experimenting With Single-Sex Education appeared first on Law Street.

Good afternoon folks! Now that our collective excitement over the Blood Moon has subsided and the moon has returned to its normal, non-bloody state, we’re going to take some time to talk about everyone’s favorite things. Rush Limbaugh wants them to stop staring at him, and Microsoft wants them to keep you from getting fat. You know where I’m going with this.

We’re talking about boobs this morning.

High school student Megan Grassel is the world’s latest boob-centric entrepreneur, having recently opened a small business called Yellowberry, which allegedly sells non-sexual bras for young girls.

Megan got the idea for the lovely little company when she took her baby sister bra shopping. According to Megan, she was “appalled” by the selection of bras available for her sister’s age group. Filled with push-up padding and covered in sequins, she found the bra selection to be hypersexual and totally inappropriate for her tweenaged sister.

So, like any budding entrepreneur, Megan saw a business opportunity. She recognized a gap in the market — non-sexual bras for younger girls, according to her — and she decided to fill it. One uber-successful Kickstarter campaign later, Yellowberry was born. The company sells neon-colored cotton bras, with no padding or sequins, aimed at girls between 11 and 15 years old. At $42.95 a pop, the store has already sold out. Megan’s a one-woman business success.

Now, before anything else, let’s talk about how this is pretty awesome on a bunch of levels. Women-owned businesses are awesome. Products that are made by and for women are awesome. Megan’s entrepreneurial spirit, smarts, and business acumen are super impressive and I applaud her for it.

However.

Let’s talk about the reason why she started Yellowberry in the first place.

Megan was freaked out by the bras that existed in the market. She deemed padding and sequins too sexual. But what if you’re just a fan of sequin-covered, sparkly, happy things? What about sequins makes bras sexual? What about padding?

The fact that bras are used to cover and support breasts. The breasts themselves are what make bras sexual. Not the fact that they’re covered in sequins. Not the fact that they’re padded. Taken alone, those facts are just descriptors added onto a piece of cloth and (maybe) wire. But Megan and her thoughts on how breasts should and shouldn’t be presented are what sexualized those bras.

And that’s kind of an issue. While Megan’s busy being appalled at how inappropriate these padded, sequined bras are, she’s simultaneously demonizing young girls who might like to wear them.

There’s an element of slut-shaming here, and a fear around the concept of adolescent sexuality. If these bras are so disgustingly hypersexual, what does that say about the girl who chooses to sport it? Presumably, that she’s some kind of oversexed harlot — not just a girl who might think sequins are fun.

Clearly, glitter is the best.

Folks, I know what it’s like to be an oversexed young girl. I started growing boobs when I was in fourth grade. Everyone — from the kids in school right down to my own parents — couldn’t wrap their heads around the fact that I was young and had breasts.

They were discussed at length. What I could wear because of them, what I couldn’t wear because of them, how I should stand, where I should go, who I should talk to. My breasts were simultaneously an asset and a huge threat. They made me cool. They made me slutty. They made me precocious and dangerous and fast.

So whenever anyone starts getting anxious about young girls and how overly sexual their breasts are, I get concerned.

What are we really saying to our teenaged girls when we shame them for wanting to wear padded, sequined bras? What message are we sending when a bra store called Yellowberry pops up, whose existence is a direct reaction to societal anxieties around adolescent breasts and sexuality?

We’re saying that young women, their bodies, and their sexualities are threatening. Their breasts need to be tamed. Their sexuality needs to be managed and contained.

So, Megan Grassel, I applaud your entrepreneurship and your colorful, no-frills bras. But I hope you’ll reevaluate your motivation for making them.

—

Hannah R. Winsten (@HannahRWinsten) 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.

Featured image courtesy of [Ralf Roletschek via Wikipedia]

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 How Feminist Is Your Bra? appeared first on Law Street.

Have you ever woken up after a night of drinks and fun, reached for your phone, and were mortified by some of the messages and emails you don’t remember sending?  If you have a phone and are at least twenty-one years old, it’s safe to assume this has happened to you at least once.  After recalling some of my own less than flattering moments, my mind shifts to one of my favorite television shows, GIRLS.

While I was catching up on the show I remembered an amazing invention one of the characters created. Last season Marnie’s ex-boyfriend Charlie, distraught over their breakup, couldn’t resist the urge to drunk dial her. Luckily he happened to be an app developer, so he created one for his phone that wouldn’t allow him to dial his ex while drinking.

I remember watching the episode and thinking, “if only it were real.” Although my days of partying and waking up to embarrassing messages are behind me, I did a bit of research and found out that there actually are apps that can prevent us from drunk dialing.

Drunk Dial No! allows its users to input contact information prior to drinking, and disable their ability to contact the designated person until the following day. This may seem silly to some, but I’m sure this technology has prevented many people from embarrassing themselves in front of exes, from giving their bosses a piece of their mind, and from sending inappropriate messages to mom when they really meant to text Tom. Even if this app isn’t appealing to the masses, we can all agree that this technology prevents people from making bad decisions.

While drunk dialing, messaging, and emailing are potentially embarrassing, there are fewer things more devastating than the loss of lives as a result of a drunk driver. Drunk driving is one hundred percent avoidable; however, when senses are impaired and the beer muscles are on, many people don’t realize the danger they are to themselves and others while driving. In 2011 alcohol related driving fatalities had declined about 69 percent since 1982. The improvements can be credited to increased penalties for driving under the influence as well as more attention focused on informing the public of its dangers. According to a study by the Century Council, 66 percent of people killed in alcohol-related car accidents were drivers. Considering these statistics, it makes sense to support alcohol-sensor technology with laws to further reduce the amount of drunk driving offenses. Just like Drunk Dial No!, these technologies would prevent bad decisions from being made in the first place, as opposed to dealing with the consequences of bad decisions.

Several States have adopted legislation that requires individuals convicted of a DUI to have alcohol-sensor devices, known as interlock systems, installed into their cars. These devices require drivers to take a Breathalyzer test before being able to operate their vehicle. In fact, a company known as Smart Start boasts more than 200,000 alcohol-sensor installations, from which there have been more than 700 million alcohol-free starts, as well as the prevention of more than seven million alcohol starts.

In 2011 Senators Tom Udall and Bob Corker introduced the ROADS SAFE Act which would have authorized $12 million for five years toward the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety program. According to the legislation, the funds would be used to explore the feasibility of vehicle interlock systems and some of the policy challenges they may face in Congress. Unfortunately, this bill, which I believe would be a step in the right direction, was lost in committee and never received the attention it deserved.

The technology to save lives exists, and car manufacturers could choose to equip cars with it. However,  I have not found any information on companies considering installing the technology, and  I find it highly unlikely that it will happen without government regulation.
—
Teerah Goodrum (@AisleNotes), is a graduate student at Howard University with a concentration in Public Administration and Public Policy. Her time on Capitol Hill as a Science and Technology Legislative Assistant has given her insight into the tech community. In her spare time she enjoys visiting her favorite city, Seattle, and playing fantasy football.

Featured image courtesy of [Robert Lachenman for the Work Projects Administration Federal Art Project via Wikipedia]

Teerah Goodrum

Teerah Goodrum is a Graduate of Howard University with a Masters degree in Public Administration and Public Policy. Her time on Capitol Hill as a Science and Technology Legislative Assistant has given her insight into the tech community. In her spare time she enjoys visiting her favorite city, Seattle, and playing fantasy football. Contact Teerah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Alcohol Apps Can Save Your Rep & Your Life appeared first on Law Street.