More Than A Magazine, A Movement
Nearly 20 years ago, social scientists Bella DePaulo and Wendy Morris described the prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination toward singles. Since their article, the number of single households has only been growing.
Single people serve their communities, have meaningful careers, benefit their families as aunts and uncles and are active participants in their faith communities. Do not use us to get attention on the news, and do not forget about us when you make policy.
There’s a reason Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign is working hard to evoke nostalgia: People who are nostalgic—meaning, people who long for America’s “good old days”—were more likely to vote for Republican candidates in the 2022 midterm elections.
Trump’s nostalgia is more than simple retrospection. Trump’s appeal isn’t just about a better economic past or a more stable society. It serves as an evocation of a time in America when women and minorities had less power.
A new state-by-state women’s health scorecard released this week by the Commonwealth Fund reveals mounting disparities in women’s health and reproductive care across the U.S.
Massachusetts, Vermont and Rhode Island top the rankings for the scorecard, which is based on 32 measures of healthcare access, quality and health outcomes. The lowest performers were Mississippi, Texas, Nevada and Oklahoma.
The findings raise concerns over the state of women’s healthcare and the ripple effects of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which has significantly altered access to critical reproductive health care services.
Project 2025, the extremist blueprint for the next Republican president, maps out the permanent reversal of more than 50 years of gains for American women and LGBTQ+ people. The authors of Project 2025—80 percent of whom served in the first Trump administration—paint a picture of a nation where women are fundamentally second class citizens.
Project 2025 contains an 887-page policy agenda. We read the whole thing, so you don’t have to. Here are the most terrifying things we found.
Serving over 7 million children in the U.S., home-based providers are often the unsung heroes of the early childhood workforce. But their heroism is not financially rewarded.
In response to the worsening caregiver crisis that emerged during the pandemic, the Thriving Providers Project (TPP) was launched in 2022 to stabilize the economic well-being of these essential workers—nearly all of whom are women—through direct cash transfers. One hundred home-based providers received $500 monthly for 18 months, alongside support services like access to mental health resources.
Lawmakers tried to reform D.C. childcare by giving big raises to many early childhood educators—which they used to pay down credit cards, move into new apartments, buy or pay off cars, schedule overdue dental procedures, help care for family members and even buy first homes.
But that project may be on the chopping block due to budget shortfalls.
At the beginning of 2024, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a $78 billion tax legislation that included the expanded CTC, but this has since stalled in the Senate. Giving unconditional cash to mothers showed us just how transformative unrestricted financial aid and support for mothers can be—so why don’t we sustain these kinds of investments in families?
Being a working mom of children doing virtual school during the pandemic, also in the middle of a graduate degree, and suddenly caring for a delusional and aggressive senior parent, while being forced to educate every single business on what guardianship legally appointed me to do was overwhelming.
Why do businesses expect a senior citizen diagnosed with an irreversible disease of the mind to make financial or health decisions? Why wasn’t the court order enough? Because a woman with legal power isn’t enough.
Working mothers and adult daughters who make up the majority of the sandwich generation need the ability to also care for their own mental and physical well-being to avoid burnout.
At the end of February, President Joe Biden’s administration announced it was going to require every state to cap its co-payments so that families that receive subsidies pay no more than 7 percent of their income towards childcare.
This important move addresses the acute need among the lowest-income families, most of whom are families of color. With the change, more than 100,000 families are expected to save about $200 a month on average, according to the White House. The change could also encourage more providers to participate in the subsidy program because they know they’ll be paid consistently for serving low-income students in the same way they are for other children. The new rule is effective April 30. Some states will be able to make the changes quickly; others will need approval from their legislatures. All will need to be in compliance by 2026.
Parents, especially parents of young children, must bring children on the campaign trail—with all the difficulties that entails—or rely on vanishing childcare slots.
Currently, federal law permits candidates to use campaign funds for a limited number of personal expenses—such as childcare—incurred only because they are campaigning with each state having their own restrictions, too. The Help America Run Act formalizes and guarantees to help level the playing field for federal candidates. Without this standard, working parents, caregivers and the candidates from marginalized communities face barriers to campaigning resulting in a Congress that does not look like the United States.
