More Than A Magazine, A Movement
Because of the filibuster, it has become nearly impossible for our elected leaders in Congress to advance the will of the people.
[This article originally appears in the Summer 2021 issue of Ms. Become a member today to read more reporting like this in print and through our app.]
Period poverty is one of America’s alarming—and often hidden—inequities.
As a member of Congress and as advocates, we share the belief that there is power in leveraging the law to help make healthy, dignified, stigma-free menstruation a reality for all.
Amy Coney Barrett has thus far demonstrated a few considerable lapses in judgment as the critical thinker and caring soul she’s purported to be.
In addition to her record, Barrett must be called to account for her hypocritical actions, words and lapses.
RBG taught us grand generosity, wisdom, wit and the need to presume some modicum of good will on all sides: “She left us the playbook.”
Jennifer Weiss-Wolf shares three RBG anecdotes—”not only on account of their stand-alone brilliance, but because when considered as a collective, they offer a blueprint for success in the mighty trio of life, love and the law that she exemplifies.”
While the numbers show women participate voraciously in civic life and outnumber men at the polls, our representation in the halls of power continues to lag.
An undeniable force in the electoral system, why don’t women’s votes translate to equal representation in political presence and policy prioritization?
A lawsuit was filed on behalf of an eleven-year-old with Down syndrome that challenges her expulsion from a federally-funded afterschool program in Austin, Texas. Why? Because she began to menstruate.
The young girl’s lawsuit—and her demand that menstruation be considered under Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972—has the potential to break new ground.
This year’s law school bar examination, in particular, is high stress and high stakes. Nearly 3,000 lawyers, law professors and recent graduates are demanding a clear, consistent statement that authorizes people to carry and use their own menstrual products while taking the bar exam in every state.
What happens when PPE is treated as a “one-size-fits-all” proposition? And when the default is the body and experience of a cisgender male? Two recent news stories highlight the dangers.
The national policy response has featured a handful of provisions that aim to advance gender and economic equity, both federally and in some states. Good news? Sort of.
At the border right now, there’s no solace for young teens who might know little about what’s happening to their bodies—yet have to summon the courage to tell a male guard and ask for pads, only to be denied or given too few to matter. Or have to manage their periods in over-crowded rooms where privacy is scant. And aren’t even able to shower or wash hands or scrub clean stained underwear.
