Ohio Tries to Ban Practically All Abortions

Last night, Ohio’s Republican House and Senate passed a bill that would ban abortions from the moment a fetal heartbeat could be detected. This could be as early as six weeks after conception–at that point many women don’t even realize they are pregnant yet. Politicians snuck it in as an attachment to an unrelated child abuse bill and it doesn’t make any exceptions for pregnancies that are the result of rape or incest. According to pro-choice groups, the so-called “heartbeat bill” is the most restrictive proposed abortion measure in the country and if it becomes law, doctors could face up to a year in prison for violating it.

There is nothing magical or medical about cardiac activity at 6 weeks, the Ohio Bill is simply designed to limit abortion 1.

— Jennifer Gunter (@DrJenGunter) December 7, 2016

2/3 You can’t even make your first OB appointment until 7-8 weeks. You get zero abnormality test results back for several weeks after that.

— Jessica Hische (@jessicahische) December 7, 2016

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: December 7, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

“You can agree with her or not, but she is not taking the easy road.”

So said the accompanying video to TIME Magazine’s announcement that Angela Merkel, the first woman to serve as Chancellor of Germany, was its choice for 2015’s “Person of the Year.”

TIME editor Nancy Gibbs announced the win, saying, “For asking more of her country than most politicians would dare, for standing firm against tyranny as well as expedience and for providing steadfast moral leadership in a world where it is in short supply, Angela Merkel is ‘TIME’s Person of the Year.'”

Merkel is more than deserving of such a title, given that since she assumed her position in 2005, she has led Germany with a compassionate yet sturdy hand, and is now one of the most respected leaders in the whole world. Most recently, she opened Germany to hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees when many other countries barred them, and steered Europe through dealing with Greece’s debt crisis.

She is also the first woman to be named Person of the Year since 1986, when Filipino president Corazon C. Aquino took home the trophy. In all, you can count the women who have won as individuals (since it was established in 1927) on one hand– excluding 1975 when it ambiguously went to “American women”.

A few women have won as part of a group, including Melinda Gates (with her husband, Bill, and Bono in 2005) and Soo Mei-ling (along with her husband, the Premier of China, in 1937). Still, it has been nearly 90 years since TIME began this annual tradition, and women barely make up 10 percent of the names.

The criteria for winning is making what TIME considers the largest impact on the world that year, whether it was for better or for worse, and I’m pretty sure there have been more than 10 women since 1927 who have made significant impacts on the world. Some men, like Barack Obama, have even won it twice. He beat out activist Malala Yousafzai in 2012 for his second win. Joseph Stalin has also won it twice, but he definitely falls under the “for worse” category (so does Adolf Hitler, 1938’s “Man of the Year”).

So on one hand, props to you, TIME, for breaking your own cycle and naming an admirable woman a title she has deserved since 2005. On the other, why aren’t women more represented?

People have, naturally, questioned Merkel’s win, especially since the reader’s choice poll had Bernie Sanders winning by a large margin.

TIME readers wanted bernie sanders but instead TIME went with mrs. austerity: angela merkel smh… https://t.co/LG8ETgecYm

— Nicolas G. V-F (@soccerplayer626) December 11, 2015

Angela Merkel Named TIME’s Person of the Year, Bernie Sanders Snubbed https://t.co/V02LEtwtW7 via @YouTube — Gregzilla (@IamGREGZILLA) December 11, 2015

The @TIME Person of the Year means nothing at all to me but how did Angela Merkel win it over Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders?

— Chris Booth (@extra_ChrisB) December 9, 2015

Listen here, Bernie supporters: I’m a big fan of Bernie Sanders. I feel the Bern daily. But Bernie has yet to make significant impacts on the world at large, though he has made strides in the United States. Merkel has been affecting the globe for a while now. I’m sure Bernie will get his chance to be “Person of the Year,” hopefully after a few more women win it. And as for you, Donald Trump…

I told you @TIME Magazine would never pick me as person of the year despite being the big favorite They picked person who is ruining Germany

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 9, 2015

Get over yourself.

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 Angela Merkel Becomes One Of A Handful Of Women To Win “Person of the Year” appeared first on Law Street.

Bernie Sanders, presidential hopeful and Independent senator from Vermont, just won Time’s poll for “Person of the Year.” The poll is a separate feature from the magazine’s own choice, but does shed a light–although an imperfect one–on current American opinion and zeitgeist.

Sanders garnered just over 10 percent of the vote, the only choice to make double digits. Malala Yousefi came in second, at just over five percent. Pope Francis, President Obama, and Stephen Colbert received 3.7, 3.5, and 3.1 percent respectively–“refugees” were at three percent.

Sanders’ win is impressive, and it’s representative of the fact that he’s certainly had an amazingly influential year. His entrance into the 2016 Democratic primary shook up what many thought was going to be an open-and-shut victory for Hillary Clinton. Although Sanders still trails Clinton in the polls, his campaign is going strong, and he continues to attract fans.

In addition to Sanders’ win, there were some other noteworthy facets of the Time poll. One of the strangest options on the list was American Pharaoh, the first horse to win the Triple Crown since 1978, with 1.4 percent of the vote. But that’s actually a pretty strong showing compared to most of our presidential candidates. Carly Fiorina had .6 percent of the vote, and Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush each had .5 percent. Ben Carson fared a little better at 1.1 percent, as did Marco Rubio. Hillary Clinton was at 1.4 percent. That’s right, a horse either beat or tied six of our presidential candidates in Time’s poll for most influential person of the year.

But, despite the fact that Bernie Sanders won the poll, he’s not actually in contention to be Time’s person of the year. That short list has been disclosed by Time, and includes Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, the ISIS leader; Black Lives Matter activists; Caitlyn Jenner; Travis Kalanick, Uber’s CEO; Angela Merkel, Vladimir Putin, Hassan Rouhani, and Donald Trump. It should be noted that Donald Trump is particularly qualified, given that he beat American Pharaoh by an impressive .4 percent on the online poll.

Time defines its criteria for choosing the person of the year as “the person TIME believes most influenced the news this year, for better or worse.” Time won’t disclose its choice until Wednesday morning, and it will be from that short list. Meanwhile, I’ll be rooting for #AmericanPharaoh2016

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 Bernie Sanders Wins Time Person of the Year Poll, Doesn’t Lose to a Horse appeared first on Law Street.

Lucky enough to have a job? Unlucky enough to have a long or expensive commute? You’re not alone, according to a new Citi study.

The average American spends $10 per day in commuting fees, clocking about 45 minutes a day in commuting time. Want to take a stab at which city boasts the highest daily roundtrip costs? Surprisingly, it’s Los Angeles—commuters shell out an average of $16 per day. New York comes in second place at $14, with Chicago and San Francisco tying for third place at $11 a day.

While people in L.A. spend the most amount of green commuting, New Yorkers spend the most amount of time getting to and from work. How long, exactly? An average of 73 minutes per day. (I myself am a tri-state area commuter who spends about double that amount of time commuting per day, and I feel the need to stress the term “average.” For every person whose commute is a breezy 20 minutes, you can find at least one poor soul who logs three to four hours of commuting time per day.

So why do people subject themselves to these crazy commutes? For some people, money is a driving factor (no pun intended). If they can take home larger salaries, they can justify spending more time and money getting to work.

Other people might actually not mind commuting. (These people have obviously never been in Port Authority during rush hour or experienced genuine hell traffic at the Lincoln Tunnel).

About 72 percent of the women involved in the study said that commuting was the only “me” time they had during the day. Husbands are not within earshot of their wives, and mothers are away from their kids. There is time to read, catch up on favorite podcasts, or swipe on some Maybelline while en route to work. Although, as a friendly PSA to my fellow ladies and other humans who put on makeup while on the train, keep it simple, quick, and scent-free…you’re in a public space, after all.

For some people, however, commuting negatively affects their everyday attitudes pretty significantly. They report feelings of anxiety and genuine dissatisfaction with their lives.

People who use public transportation reported higher levels of anxiety compared to people who commuted privately (i.e. drove their own cars).

The most recent study showed that 49 percent of those polled who do not ride their bikes to work would do so if their town/city offered a bike-share program, especially in Los Angeles and Chicago. New York City has had its Citi-sponsored bike-sharing initiative running since 2013, with plans to launch 1,000 newer & slimmer Olympic-style bikes this month.

Commuting might stink both literally and metaphorically at times, but what’s the alternative? Not everyone can work from home. Only the strong can commute. We schlep, we drive, we work, we ride NJ Transit. Then we wake up and do it all over again.

Corinne Fitamant

Corinne Fitamant is a graduate of Fordham College at Lincoln Center where she received a Bachelors degree in Communications and a minor in Theatre Arts. When she isn’t pondering issues of social justice and/or celebrity culture, she can be found playing the guitar and eating chocolate. Contact Corinne at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Are You Schlepping to Work in This City With the Longest Commute? appeared first on Law Street.

Okay, so it didn’t try to ban it as much as it suggested that it should be banned–in a poll asking readers to vote which word should be removed from the English language.

Which is still a problem.

TIME is kind of a big deal. I mean, it is nationally recognized for breaking news and excellent writing. So why would a high-brow publication imply that “feminist” is a bad word? And why in the world would it place it alongside words whose use absolutely should be forbidden like “bae” or “turnt”?

Apparently, TIME does not think feminism itself is bad. It just think the word is bad. Yes, let’s by all means quit using the word associated with such a fantastic movement. What would it have us do instead, telepathically communicate our feminist discussions? Keep fighting for feminism, but without talking about it?

The reasoning behind its inclusion on the list seems simple: “When did it become a thing that every celebrity had to state their position on whether this word applies to them, like some politician declaring a party? Let’s stick to the issues and quit throwing this label around like ticker tape at a Susan B. Anthony parade.”

LOL YOU’RE SO CLEVER, TIME.

Just because celebrities decide to discuss feminism does not mean it is any less important. Besides, celebrities discussing the movement keeps it in the news and in discussions. That is good! As for whether or not “this word applies to them,” doesn’t feminism apply to everyone with social or political views? As in you either agree with feminist ideals or you don’t?

To make its argument even more irrelevant, its cover girl this issue is Taylor Swift–a recently declared feminist–who even discusses her adoption of the title in her TIME interview. The inconsistency is astounding.

For awhile, “feminist” was the option that was ahead in the polls–thanks for the most part to troll factories like 4chan.com and 9gag.com, which have made news recently for targeting feminist celebrities by leaking their nude photographs.

Luckily, TIME editors came to their senses and discontinued the poll. Managing editor Nancy Gibbs even inserted a little note on the article:

TIME apologizes for the execution of this poll; the word ‘feminist’ should not have been included in a list of words to ban. While we meant to invite debate about some ways the word was used this year, that nuance was lost, and we regret that its inclusion has become a distraction from the important debate over equality and justice.

Thanks, Nancy, but maybe you should have caught on to the loss of its “nuance” before the poll was published. Instead of inviting a debate focused on feminism’s true meaning, you invited anti-feminists to exploit the polls and brought negative attention to the concept.

In response to TIME, I will conduct a poll of my own in which you vote on which word is worse than “feminist.” Tweet your vote to @TIME and be sure to include #wordsmoreannoyingthanfeminist. Here are your choices:

• Patriarchy
• Male dominance
• Rape
• Inequality
• Racism
• Bipartisan

Let TIME know what you think.

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 TIME Ends Feminist-Banning Poll, But It’s Too Little Too Late appeared first on Law Street.