More Than A Magazine, A Movement
Last week, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced on social media that he proudly ended the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) program inside the Department of Defense (DOD). He tweeted: “WPS is yet another woke divisive/social justice/Biden initiative that overburdens our commanders and troops—distracting from our core task: WAR-FIGHTING.”
This attack on WPS efforts at the DOD undermines the safety and security of America and its troops, at home and abroad.
“Your body, my choice.” That misogynist credo is the crux of the blockbuster Netflix mini-series, Adolescence, the third most-watched English language show of all time on Netflix. The show continues to provoke debate about the impact of social media on the mental health of boys, in a world dominated by the manosphere, and its power to transform boys’ into violent misogynists.
Surprisingly, porn was the one missing element in the otherwise brilliant four-part Netflix drama.
The show centers on a 13-year-old boy, Jamie—a typical lad, vulnerable, like so many other young men, to the venom of online misogyny spewed through unbridled social media, chatrooms, blogs and podcasts. This angry ideology, masquerading as manly virtue, blames women for male alienation and promotes violent sexuality and the dehumanization of women—the very narratives of porn.
Under Trump’s America, violence against women isn’t just ignored—it’s become a deliberate political strategy. Powerful men accused of abuse are actively protected and celebrated by the Trump administration, while survivors and those who stand up for them are punished and silenced. (Just look at the attacks and public shaming Christine Blasey Ford had to endure after courageously coming forward with her sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh.) From legal interventions and judicial appointments to funding cuts, Trump has systematically dismantled protections for women and emboldened those who harm them.
Earlier this month, a jury of ten men and two women was unable to come to a unanimous decision after a week’s deliberation. They were judging the trial of former correctional officer Darrell Wayne Smith, nicknamed “Dirty Dick,” accused of 15 counts of sexual misconduct. Smith was the last correctional officer to be charged with abuse at the now-shut-down FCI Dublin, as part of a sprawling federal investigation that convicted seven officers, including the prison’s warden and chaplain.
After World War II, German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller famously said, “First they came for the socialists and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.” We are watching this happen in real time with the Trump administration.
Donald Trump has targeted immigrants, such as Kilmar Abrego Garcia, with illegal deportation; then he came after workers’ rights, with cuts to overtime pay and rolling back rights to unionize; then he came for the hungry, with cuts to food programs and Medicaid; then he came for the low-income children, with the elimination of Head Start child care; then he came for the sick, with cuts to funding for medical research; then he came for women, with cuts to reproductive healthcare and funding for domestic violence shelters and rape crisis hotlines; then he came for disabled and elderly people, with cuts to Social Security and Medicare—and so much more.
Trump is boundary testing. If you give him an inch, he will take it all, until he has obliterated all resistance—and our democracy.
Feminist writers have long argued that there is an intrinsic relationship between patriarchy, rape and colonialism. The seizure of land by force is comparable to the seizure of a woman’s body—and historically rape and war have often gone hand-in-hand.
In order to get a better understanding of how Donald Trump’s attitudes towards women might be related to his foreign policy, I reached out to Dr. Judith Herman, a world-renowned expert in trauma studies.
“The rules are pretty straightforward: The strong do what they please because they can. The weak submit because they have no other choice. And the bystanders are either complicit or too terrified to intervene, or just don’t care. These are the same rules whether we are talking about international relations or whether we’re talking about intimate personal relations.”
An excerpt from Human/Animal: A Bestiary in Essays (out April 22 from Wilfrid Laurier University Press), Chapter 5: “On Catching and Being Caught.”
“I knew enough stories of violence to know that if I did not try and something happened, I would be to blame. … I went to the police station … The tall white man with a buzz cut who came out to talk to me was dismissive. What do you want us to do, ma’am? I wanted a restraining order. Unless our neighbors were caught in the act of trespassing, unless we could prove without a doubt that we were being followed, there wasn’t anything they would do. …
“The camera was visible from where they parked their car, no branches or shrubs hiding its location, its lens pointed directly at where they stood. … Their yelling entered through our living room window and took up all the air in the room. Since the camera only recorded image, I felt I was watching a terrible movie with surround sound, their voices not coming out of the television, but through the windows, bouncing off the plaster walls. … I didn’t want to watch them anymore. I could not stop watching them. I know you have a crush on me. You want to watch me. You want to look at me. I know it.
“This sounds familiar. When children are teased, especially when it’s boys teasing girls, adults will often use crushes to explain away the trouble. He is pestering you (or worse) because he likes you.”
When The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg revealed last month that he had inadvertently been invited into a Signal group chat of senior U.S. national security officials, the news dominated headlines, cable broadcasts and social media for several days.
While Democratic lawmakers called for an investigation into the incident, Trump officials set their sights elsewhere: on Goldberg himself. The harassment Goldberg faced was an unusually intense pile-on, but it underscores the increasingly common trend of targeting individual journalists by administration officials and even President Donald Trump.
“You can be a little heartened by the extent to which the administration is going after the news media, because it is probably the biggest threat to their agenda,” said Elisa Lees Muñoz, executive director of the Washington-based International Women’s Media Foundation. “It does speak to the power of the news media as the ultimate source of holding people to account.”
For four decades, MADRE has challenged the status quo of international aid, proving that lasting feminist change begins with grassroots movements and bold, collective action.
A spate of 11 femicides in Italy so far this year is making global headlines and prompting calls for “cultural rebellion.” Yet femicide is far worse in the U.S., claiming thousands of lives a year, and comparatively normalized. It’s where the cultural pushback is needed most.
Last month, the U.N.’s annual two-week Conference on the Status of Women wrapped up in New York, having barely addressed growing threats of gender-based violence and without acknowledging the elephant in the room: how Trump administration policy swerves threaten to undo decades of progress for women, including women in the U.S.