Beautify Me, Cruelty Free

If you have ever experienced overwhelming guilt after finding out your favorite mascara was tested on animals, then there is a pretty good chance that this article is for you. There is quite literally no reason for a beauty company to use animal testing with all the synthetic materials we have now to recreate a realistic body. Yet, many companies still do test on animals. In this post, I talk about what cruelty-free beauty really is and what my favorite products are.

People often equate cruelty-free and vegan products, when technically a vegan product might not be cruelty-free and a cruelty-free product might not be vegan. Vegan products do not contain ay animal products, such as honey, egg, or milk. Vegan products can be cruelty-free despite having animal products, because no animals were necessarily harmed in acquiring the ingredients and if the products were not tested on animals. Ethical Elephant, a vegan lifestyle blog, created these diagrams to help visualize the differences in cruelty-free and vegan beauty products:

To find out which brands were indeed cruelty-free, much research had to be done. Luckily, someone else has already done all of this, and now we just have to look up the specific brands in question. There are a few issues to note in how this process became more complicated, however. Differences in federal regulations between countries has made it confusing to find out which beauty brands are cruelty-free. Take Clinique for example, which is owned by Estee Lauder. Clinique’s website states the following:

Clinique Laboratories, LLC. is committed to the elimination of animal testing. We are equally committed to consumer health and safety, and bringing to market products that comply with applicable regulations in every country in which our products are sold.

We do not conduct animal testing on our products or ingredients, nor ask others to test on our behalf, except when required by law. We evaluate our finished products in clinical tests on volunteer panels.

Clinique Laboratories, LLC. fully supports the development and global acceptance of non-animal testing alternatives. To this end, the Company works extensively with the industry at large and the global scientific community to research and fund these alternatives.

I’m calling Clinique’s bluff. Taking note of the sections underlined, if the company was truly invested in eliminating animal testing, then it would not put it’s own personal income and revenue first by selling in China, where animal testing is required by law. To me, any company that puts profit before ethics is not a cruelty-free company.

One of the most difficult tasks in my search for cruelty free beauty products was finding out which brands were completely free of animal testing, not only within their specific brand, but also the company that owns the brand. For example, NYX is a cruelty free makeup brand part of PETA’s Beauty Without Bunnies program, the ultimate resource for cruelty-free shoppers. However, NYX is owned by L’Oreal, which sells products in China where beauty products are required by law to be tested on animals. While you will not find NYX products in China, you will find other L’Oreal products, and every NYX purchase will end up support L’Oreal. So, it’s up to you to decide whether or not NYX is a cruelty-free brand.

Here is a detailed list of my favorite cruelty-free products.

•  Hair
• • Shampoo/Conditioner – I use the solid shampoo and conditioners from Lush. I originally purchased these to take on an airplane since they aren’t liquid and I fell in love with both. I currently use the citrusy Montablano shampoo bar, which smells absolutely delicious and instantly brightens my morning, and the Sugar Daddy-O solid conditioner, which does not smell nearly as good as my shampoo but leaves my hair perfectly silky and soft. I will probably never go back to regular shampoo as long as Lush sells these products.
  • Hairspray – I don’t use many hair products except for one hairspray by Verb. I have very fine hair and I rarely do anything to it, so I only use the Leave-in Mist when I am blow drying my hair. While I love how this spray makes my hair feel, it is extremely thick and does not come out of the spray bottle easily.
• Body
• • Body Scrub – I make my own body scrub using scented epsom salts and coconut oil. It exfoliates away all of the dead skin while giving my skin a lot of hydration. Also, since I buy my coconut oil at Costco and my epsom salts in a bulk bag from Spouts, I’m really saving money by making my own scrub.
  • Body Wash – Lush has the best smelling cruelty-free body washes. I am currently using their Rose Jam Shower Gel, which is only available in the winter (just to give you an idea of how long the bottle lasts, I’ve had this one since January and I’m only about halfway through it. It’s April). My favorite year-round scent is Plum Rain and I also used to swear by The Olive Branch, however I stopped using it because it was not self-preserving but since then, Lush has put out a new self-preserving formula.
  • Shaving Gel – I make my own shaving gel using coconut oil and olive oil. I have had no ingrown hairs or shaving cuts since I switched to homemade and my legs are extremely smooth. Pro-tip: I also use recycled razors from Preserve.
• Face
• • Face Wash – I make my own scrub and then use a face cleanser from one of my favorite beauty companies, Mario Badescu. If you have very particular skin and many products do not agree with you, then I highly suggest testing out Mario Badescu products. I use the Enzyme Cleansing Gel currently, but I have tried half a dozen of their other products. They also make great face masks. My homemade face scrub is just coconut oil, coffee grounds, and brown sugar; it smells delicious and leaves my face super smooth.
  • Face Lotion – I use pure hyaluronic acid serum from Cosmedica Skincare as my daily moisturizer since my skin is so sensitive and picky. If I’m going in the sun, I use Alba Botanica’s SPF 30 Kid’s Mineral Sunscreen. Don’t ask me why, but I’m convinced kid’s sunscreen is better for sensitive skin.
• Makeup
• • Primer – Remember when Smashbox came out with those photo primers and sold each bottle for like $30? Luckily, NYX makes a much more affordable dupe of those called the Studio Perfect Primer. I use the green one because my face is splotchy and it works very well to even my skin tone and serve as a smooth base to apply my makeup.
  • Foundation – While Tarte is a little pricier, I am very picky with my choice in foundations. I like full coverage but you have to be able to layer it, because I don’t actually like to wear it as full coverage, I just need that option in case I get a bad zit or a blemish. I recently switched away from Clinique to the  Rainforest of the Sea Water Foundation and it’s the best foundation I’ve used so far.
  • Concealer – I like my concealers to be a little thick and I dab them on with a Q-tip. Anastasia Beverly Hills makes a pretty pricy Concealer but you barely need to use any of it, so the small container lasts for quite some time.
  • Setting Powder – Hear me out on this one. I use a powder from Lush that is called Silky Underwear Body Dusting Powder. I’m pretty sure this isn’t supposed to go on your face, but it sucks up moisture like a vacuum and works perfectly on my oily skin.
  • Bronzer/Blush/Highlight – I have a bronzer and blush from Bare Minerals that are so old they don’t have them on the website anymore. It’s just the basic Bare Minerals bronzer and blush, which clearly I never use. I love everything Fenty Beauty has, but I’m just daring enough to wear Rihanna’s bold and shiny highlighters and bronzers. Literally all of the highlighters are incredible. A few products by Milk Makeup are on my wishlist, including the Holographic Highlighting Powder and Matte Bronzer,
  • Eyeshadow – I’m pretty boring with eyeshadow and just go for the fan favorite, Urban Decay Naked Palettes. I have the basics palette and Naked2.
  • Mascara – I get so many mascaras as mini free samples or full size samples, so every few weeks I use a different brand and never end up purchasing it myself. However, I can name two mascaras that I have used in the past and loved. Pacifica can be purchased at target or in some drug stores. They have a mascara called the Stellar Gaze Mineral Mascara that puts high end brands to shame. I also like Buxom‘s Lash Mascara, which really lengthens my eyelashes.
  • Eyebrows – I don’t do much to my eyebrows, but lately I’ve been filling them in because I splurged on the Anastasia Beverly Hills Brow Wiz. I have patchy eyebrows and I really like the versatility of this pencil and how similar to my eyebrow color it is. I also have a bad case of flyaway eyebrows, so I use Urban Decay’s Brow Tamer to keep them all in place.

You can find extensive lists of cruelty-free beauty and makeup products here:

Cruelty Free Kitty: The Ultimate Guide to Cruelty-Free and Vegan Makeup Brands

Ethical Elephant: Complete List of 100% Vegan Makeup & Skincare Brands

PETA: Beauty Without Bunnies

More Than a Gun Problem

For twelve years of their lives, children in the United States have one of the most incredible opportunities: to attend publicly funded schools. Underpaid schoolteachers wake up every morning to teach and mentor a total of 50.7 million public school students across the country. For many, school is a safe haven, a place far from the troubles brought to these young lives in their homes. Schools are more than a house of learning, they are a place of safety and security.

Yet, hundreds of students have been shot at school over the past 5 years.

On Valentine’s Day in Parkland, Florida, seventeen children were murdered at school in a homicide carried out by a recently expelled student. Nikolas Cruz legally obtained an AR-15 after being reported to the FBI, diagnosed with mental illness, and displaying signs of violence. The left are demanding change in gun laws to prevent atrocities like this from occurring again. The right are offering their thoughts and prayers, saying “now is not the time to talk about gun control,” and “it’s not just about guns.”

When is the right time to talk about gun control? Just over 6% of the 239 school shootings shown in the chart below* meet the guidelines to be classified as a mass shooting. In only 16 of these events, four or more people were shot. In the other 223 instances, at least one bullet was fired on school grounds. A weapon equipped with the power to discharge bullets quickly, to kill numerous people in a short time, was present on a school campus. Regardless if the gun was fired or not, does the presence of a gun on the premises of an educational facility raise a red flag?

Source: Gun Violence Archive

*”The nonprofit defines a school shooting as an episode on the property of an elementary school, secondary school or college campus. Another defining characteristic is timing — shootings must occur during school hours or during extracurricular activities.”

We are being told to take time to grieve and process what is happening in the United States right now. We should not be pushing our political agenda in the wake of a tragedy, we should not use dead children as a prop for our next gun control movement. Elected officials and political influencers are crying for sympathy, while the victims of the Parkland shooting are working tirelessly to fight for change.

My question for you, Tomi, is how many more children need to be murdered before we are allowed to talk about this? We pray that this never happens. We pray for the families affected when it does happen. We do so much thinking and so little doing. Once we start doing something about it, we are told to stop. Above all, we are told it’s not about guns. And you know what? They’re right.

It’s not just about guns, it’s about mental health.

 

According to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, 43.8 million adults experience mental illness per year. That is 1 in 5 adults in the United States experiencing mental illness of any degree. However, 60% of diagnosed adults and 50% of youth did not receive any mental health services.

Mental healthcare in the United States is pretty dismal and it is not looking to improve anytime in the near future. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) under the Obama Administration required insurers to cover mental healthcare as an essential health benefit. Every major Republican proposal against the ACA did not include mental healthcare. President Trump’s budget blueprint will reallocate money from mental health services to other departments by 2019. The budget for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration will be cut by $665 million. The budget for NIMH will be cut by over 30%, from $1.6 billion to $1.1 billion. Additionally, “the Trump administration [has] decided against renewing a 3-year firearms research initiative.” (Epstein).

 

Source: National Institute of Mental Health

This data is reflected in a report issued by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). Slightly more white Americans experience mental illness than African American or Hispanic Americans. Significantly more females experience mental illness than males. Women receive more mental health treatment than men, and in most gun incidents, the assailant is male. However, the numbers do not add up. The majority of school shootings are initiated by white men, yet white men receive significantly more mental health treatment than that of minorities with mental illness.

The numbers do line up when analyzing demographics of healthcare in the United States. African American and Hispanic people used mental health services at half the rate of white people and Asian Americans at about a third the rate. But the numbers don’t line up when comparing the ratio of white people receiving treatment to black/Hispanic and the number of white mass shooters, which leads us directly to the next problem.

It’s not just about mental health, it’s about white supremacy.

There is no doubt that mass shootings of any kind, but especially school shootings, skew towards white male shooters. Mother Jones collected data on every single United States mass shooting between 1982 and February 2018, by mass shooter’s race and ethnicity. The vast majority of shooters have one thing in common: they are mostly white. The full dataset can be found here, with information ranging from how many killed to the type of weapon and whether it was purchased legally. To make it easier to visualize, below is a chart depicting the data collected by Mother Jones.

In the gun control argument, we always hear, “people in gangs and thugs will still have their guns.” Are these people the ones shooting up schools? No. The children who live in broken homes in a forgotten society defined by violence and oppression are not the ones shooting up schools. This argument is taking a white problem and laying it on minority populations.

In fact, let’s take a look at the education system. The majority of low-income and underserved schools are populated by minorities. I had the opportunity to speak with a retired teacher who taught at what was once the “worst” Buffalo Public High School.

Buffalo Public Schools have a notorious reputation for high turnover rates with new faculty. It is no surprise that new teachers might have difficulty in a school full of troubled, at-risk youth. But instability is the core of these kids’ lives: Will there be food on the table today? Will mom be high when I get home? Will I have to take care of my younger siblings again? Will dad ever come home? For many of these kids, school is the one source of stability they have, even if its not as stable as the schools of their upper middle class counterparts.

School is where many of these kids went not only to learn, but to feel safe:

We had [in the classrooms] no technology, no whiteboards, no books, no shelves, no cabinets, no supplies. Most of the kids came to school to be safe, they wanted to come all year round. Fights were common, but we never saw guns and rarely saw knives. Even at extracurricular activities.

At school, kids have an opportunity to be themselves without the burden of their daily home struggles. Even if their homes are coated with remnants from drug abuse, gang violence, and poverty, these kids get to be exactly who they really are when they are at school: they get to be kids. The argument that “thugs” and “gangsters” will still get a gun means nothing when it comes to school shootings. If these “thugs” and “gangsters” were such a threat to school safety, how come they aren’t shooting up schools? This argument is typical in the United States, though; taking the white man’s problem and pushing it onto minorities. Just because someone is black and poor does not make them a threat to national security. It’s time to stop using this as an argument against gun control.

Now let’s talk about the Constitution. It is so white to be obsessed with the Constitution. The piece of paper was originally written with no regard to anyone but the white man. Upon its initial creation, only white men had basic rights in the United States. It took 78 years and a war for African Americans to become recognized as humans with the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery. Another 5 years passed before African Americans could legally vote, but voter suppression prevented African Americans in the South from voting for nearly another 100 years. So much time passed with no denial that white men continued to oppress minorities through constitutional loopholes. There were so many problems with the Constitution and how it disregarded people of color, minorities, and women. So, we changed it. We added amendments, amended amendments, and redefined how we interpret the document. We presented Acts and laws to close these loopholes. But, when we challenge the white man and their undying love for the 2nd Amendment, why are we immediately shot down? What else is it that is preventing gun control? Who else is preventing gun control?

It’s not just about white supremacy, it’s about the ultimate oppressor.

The Grand Old Party.

GOP politicians have been attacking schools, healthcare, and gun control for years. Trump promised to get rid of ObamaCare, and when senators and representatives discussed the repeal of the ACA, the new GOP led proposed healthcare bill would give states the opportunity to create their own healthcare bill. This means states would bear 100% of all additional costs, which for millions of Americans would mean “restricted access to Medicaid, restricted access to affordable coverage and restricted access to lifesaving mental health and addictions treatment,” says Michael Petruzzelli of the National Council for Behavioral Health.

Massachusetts Democratic Representative Joe Kennedy questioned the GOP healthcare bill about the changes to what was previously considered required healthcare services:

“[Those benefits are] no longer essentially covered, or required to be covered, by this version of this text. Is that not correct?”

“The text before us does remove the application of the essential health benefits for the alternative benefit plans in Medicaid.”

“Including mental health?”

“Yes.”

GOP lawyers and lawmakers blatantly admitted to wanting to remove mental healthcare as a medical necessity for states to cover. Despite Democratic representatives introducing amendments that would include mental health coverage, the GOP consistently silenced any attempts. Not only do these amendments include coverage for various mental illnesses, but also for substance abuse and a variety of other life-imposing ailments that affect millions of Americans.

As if Trump’s and the GOP couldn’t be anymore hostile towards mental health efforts, the president revoked Obama-era gun checks for nearly 75,000 people receiving social security for mental illness and those unable to take care of their finances. The memo was written following the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School that killed 20 first graders as well as 6 others in 2013. Had the legislation gone into affect, people with certain mental illnesses would be barred from purchasing a firearm. Trump got rid of this within his first two months in office.

Need I say anything about the massive amounts of donations GOP politicians receive from the NRA? While these senators were offering up their hollow and meaningless “thoughts and prayers,” the New York Daily News retaliated for all of us.

 

So, what do we do now?

When our dear elected officials and political influencers tell us, “it’s not about guns,” they are right. It’s about them. There is a solution, there is promise for a safer future, we will remove the threat of gun violence in our schools.

And we will do so by organizing and voting. At the end of this article is a list of gun control organizations and ways to help elect politicians who will promise to take gun safety to the capitol. It’s about more than just guns, it’s about our healthcare system, it’s about the still evident hierarchy of race, and it’s about one political party choosing money over social values.

—–

Everytown is a nonprofit organization with a message that every single town in the United States is affected by gun violence. Everytown works to “end gun violence and build safer communities.” This organization takes on political leaders and gun lobbies that have put gun control on hold. Their website lists ways to help, from donating, attending events, or contacting your representatives.

Moms Demand Action is a subset of Everytown on the grassroots level that was created after Sandy Hook by stay-at-home mom Shannon Watts. From the point of view from mothers, this organization has gained incredible traction and is one of the main faces in the fight for gun control. You can donate or find a local event near you.

Giffords was founded by former Arizona congresswoman Gabby Gifford after she was shot in a mass shooting in Tuscon, Arizona. While Gabby and her husband survived, 6 others were killed and 12 were injured. After Sandy Hook, Gifford partnered with the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence to advocate for gun control and change policy in Washington.

The Brady Campaign is truly a unique organization. Created after Jim Brady was shot in an assassination attempt on former President Ronald Reagan, this nonprofit is one of the longest serving gun control organizations in the country. With decades of experience and major successes such as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, The Brady Campaign is currently aiming to cut gun deaths in half by 2025. Find a local chapter near you to volunteer with.

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence was founded in the 1970s and works behind the scenes to draft and pass legislation for gun control and gun safety. The CSGV works with scientific experts to create evidence-based legislation within the states with a goal of securing a victory at the federal level.

March for our Lives is taking place on March 24th of this year in Washington DC as well as in local communities. You can join a march, plan a march, or head to DC for the main march.

#NeverAgainMSD is a social media campaign that collects data from all of these organizations and more as well as interviews, videos, and other means of information. Follow them to stay in the loop about the efforts taken to enact gun control after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting.

The Democratic Party has a list of all state Democratic Party websites. You can find events and volunteer opportunities near you to help elect pro-gun control politicians in the 2018 elections.

 

 

The Aziz Ansari Encounter: A Multifaceted Approach to Sexual Oppression

Before you read this, I want to make a quick disclaimer about my views on feminism and the plight of women. I am a very strong advocate for equality of the sexes including any and all gender identifications or lack thereof. Sexual harassment and assault is a serious issue across the globe, with men, women, and overwhelmingly so the LGBTQ+ community as victims. What you are about to read may come across as controversial, but what is the point of opinion journalism if it doesn’t spark argument and debate? Anyways, proceed not with caution, but with an open mind.

In mid-January, the online journal Babe published what immediately became a controversial piece about an encounter between a young woman and comedian Aziz Ansari. Babe is a journal based on publishing stories that are antithetical to the norm; it’s reputation has grown to be defined as badass, rebellious, and unapologetically female. This medium is the perfect platform to publish an ‘uncensored and unfiltered’ piece about a popular celebrity icon who, as Babe would word it, royally f***ed up. However, the author of the article as well as many of it’s supporters view sexual oppression from a single angle when it truly should be examined with a multifaceted approach.

In case you have not read the article, I’ll sum it up in a few sentences. A woman met Ansari at the 2017 Emmy Awards after party. They exchanged numbers and proceeded to flirt and chat via text until Ansari asked the young woman on a date. After dinner, the pair returned to Ansari’s apartment where they engaged in sexual activities that involved both to remove their clothes. When the woman revealed she was uncomfortable with how fast they were moving, they put their clothes back on but Ansari continued to treat the encounter like a one-time hookup. The woman left his apartment distraught, but without engaging in intercourse. In the Babe article, the woman states that she was sexually assaulted and chose to speak up after Ansari appeared at the 2018 Golden Globes wearing a “Time’s Up” pin in support of women opening up about their experiences with sexual oppression.

1. We need to look at relationship-based sexual oppression differently.

Everything Babe published in this article is extremely important and we as a predominantly masochistic society need to talk about it. However, there is an approach we need to take towards sexual oppression that is much more complex than how this article explains it.  To make it easier to understand, I made this simplified chart below to help visualize the multifaceted concept. Please note that this is a simplified version, focusing just on the three primary areas of sexual oppression in this context.

Sexual oppression cannot be discussed within one channel. It is quite inappropriate to say that one experience with sexual oppression is worse than another, because you cannot tell someone how they should feel or react to any situation. This is why there must be different channels, and for the sake of this article, I have divided it into three channels. These are my loose definitions of categorizing the three most common areas of sexual oppression in terms of relationships.

Sexual assault is physical and lacks consent of any kind. Defined as the most intense form of relationship based sexual oppression, this channel includes rape, sexual based torture, forced consent, and even groping. While the severity of being touched inappropriately with clothes remaining on compared to forced, nonconsensual sex are drastically different, I have defined assault as any kind of uncalled for and undesired physical action.

Sexual harassment is mostly verbal and also without consent. Keyword here is mostly. This channel has a much wider definition, as some people might not see an event as harassment, but rather an encounter. Any type of inappropriate conduct in the workplace falls under this category as long as it does not include any physical contact. Unnecessary and incessant remarks whether in person or online. Perhaps someone at the bar keeps putting their hands on your back or shoulders, but not quite physical enough to be able to clearly define if you are being groped.

One question that arises from these two loosely defined channels is: where do we define visual encounters? For example, your boss sits you down in his office and pleasures himself in front of you, without making any physical contact or inappropriate verbal outbursts? Encounters like this can have an extremely detrimental mental effect on the victim, yet they do not fall under these simplified definitions of assault and harassment. The definitions of these channels are not all-encompassing; there are grey areas within grey areas, which furthers the complexity of relationship-based sexual oppression.

That being said, there is a large grey area that can have an overwhelming emotional effect on the victim without being forceful. Sexual encounters are the epitome of confusing and indefinable grey areas. The individual did not really say yes, but they also did not say no. The individual did not feel right during the encounter, but did not find the strength to leave. Technically, these encounters can be viewed as completely consensual, which makes them even more confusing for all parties involved. However, at least one participant leaves the situation feeling wrong, which can leave a negative residue on their emotional wellbeing. This is what happened to the girl in the Babe article.

2. Subconscious ignorance is a thing and it is not going away anytime soon.

The basis of sexual encounters are where the problem lies: encounters are perpetuated by the innate dominance traits held by men. Take this scenario, for example:

A man and a woman meet at a bar. They immerse themselves friendly banter and exchange phone numbers. They meet for a date in the following week and the man takes more interest in the woman. He does not read her visual signs of losing interest, because for generations, men have never needed to learn what those signs are, as they are placed in a dominant role. The woman does not want to be rude to him, so she agrees to a second date. He thinks she is interested, and makes a move on her. Until the woman verbally and physically demands that she is not consenting, this is an unfortunate encounter because she has uncomfortably agreed to everything. It may leave her rattled, distraught, and emotionally jarred for weeks.

Encounters like this happen every week to millions of women, but there is a level of ignorance that must be taken into account. For generations, men have been placed as the dominant figure in social relations. Men are ignorant to visual commands of women, they are terrible at reading the women’s room, and they automatically take a defensive position whenever they are challenged. These traits are rooted in their masculinity but they absolutely do not give men the right to put women through sexual encounters. As long as the statement, “women are oppressed” stands true, men are going to live with their internal ignorance. Once that ignorance has dissipated, perhaps in the scope of relationships, may men and women be equal. Until then, it is extremely important for women to tread more heavily than they are now. Until then, women must remember that men sometimes think with the brain between their thighs instead of the one in their head.

I promise you, this will change. It just will not change as fast as we want it to.

For some, this is not news. It took decades for African Americans to be considered more than slaves or servants in the eyes of their white counterparts. In 1865, African Americans were no longer legally considered property. Racism ensued for over 100 years despite the law changing. Social change does not happen overnight, in fact, black women are some of the most oppressed females in the United States both socially and economically. African American women often change their hair so their natural curls will not deny them jobs as a way to reduce their likelihood of workplace oppression. Is this good? No, it is absolutely terrible that people are still denied work due to their natural looks. But until African American women are equal, and the likelihood of being denied a job based on looks is gone, is it not in one’s favor to reduce the chances of being oppressed?

Women, I beg you, please help yourself when you face a sexual encounter, because right now men are not privy to what goes on in our female heads.

3. Social media and social movement are a toxic marriage.

We have this incredible tool literally at our fingertips, but more often then not, social media is used in a way that is detrimental to social movements. Social media has the capacity to engage and empower millions of people. There is safety behind the computer screen because we are able to take part in meaningful conversation or heated debate without revealing our identity. Protesting has cost people jobs and reputation, but now we can hide behind a screen name and have the potential to leave a residual effect on a protest.

Social movements only work when they remain simple, which social media can make tricky to achieve. This chart is an immensely dumbed-down version of three important branches of a social movement.

 

A successful social movement needs to be simple. Think of it as a flowchart: first, we will write to our local government to show our anger. Then, we will march in protest at some important event where there will be news media. Following our media stunt, we will begin to propose possible alternatives to whatever it is we are upset about. Simple, yet effective. With strength in numbers, lawmakers (or whoever is able to change the item that is being protested) must move to do what their constituency or following desire. Lastly, a short but meaningful message that gets people talking may be the most important aspect of a social movement. This is as important as a marketing tagline or catchphrase. This message is what people will remember and repeat.

Why the heck am I talking about social movements and what does this have to do with the Babe article?

Well, consider this. #MeToo brought forward horrific accounts of women’s oppression in the workplace and beyond. We learned that visual assault can leave scars as deep as physical assault. We learned that thousands of women have been verbally harassed in the workplace that led them to act in ways that made them uncomfortable. This movement was about specific, definable actions inundated upon women, men, and the LGBTQ+ community. The success of this movement is impressive; its following gained millions of supporters with multiple taglines along with #MeToo such as “Times Up.”

This is where the Babe article became problematic. The allegations against Ansari are so important because it opens up this ignorance within men that many have been unable to see. However, adding another channel to an already complex movement can tip the scale. See the chart below, which breaks down the complexity of what should be much simpler.

We need to talk about sexual encounters and the implied ignorance of society, but is #MeToo the time? Can we really say every man who has failed to recognize his privilege is an assailant?

The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement faced this issue. One major part of the BLM movement was to reveal that white cops are especially harsh on young black men. This part of the movement was executed extremely well. Polling centers released data on the unequal treatment of people of color in the justice system, flawless marketing techniques were employed with chants like “Hands up, don’t shoot” and a memorable catch phrase and hashtag of “Black lives matter.” Were there problems within the movement? Of course, many protests turned violent and overwhelmed some cities. However, these are not the results of poor social media construction.

The BLM movement began to fail when another branch was forced upon it by a group of people who did not have a place in that end of the movement: white men. Suddenly, every single account of a white man being accosted by a police officer came to light. Police brutality is a problem that must be addressed, but with BLM we were talking about brutality specifically towards black men. We need to talk about police brutality, but BLM was not the appropriate time to talk about brutality against white men.

Sexual encounters are really important, we need to be better as a society to teach our sons that they are not dominant and that they must learn nonverbal signs of discomfort. However, when we are discussing assault and harassment, is it really the right time to talk about encounters?

4. Last thoughts.

We cannot ever say that one form of relationship-based sexual oppression is worse than another, however not all forms of this oppression can be treated the same way. Assault and harassment are easier to define than encounters, plus encounters have the baggage of discussing ignorance as well. I truly do not believe the Babe article should have been published when it was. I understand that the woman involved is hurting and distraught, but confusing the oppressor weakens a movement. The proper method to conducting a social movement online is difficult. A multifaceted approach must be taken to countering oppression through social movement. Poor timing can completely derail a movement, even if the message broadcasted is an important one.

When the oppressor feels attacked, they will take a defensive stance. Significantly more men have been the engaging party in an encounter rather than a harassment or assault. Suddenly, after the Babe article was released, the oppressor became uncomfortable. At first, I thought, “Good, let men feel attacked. Force them to realize that they have to learn all kinds of signals and the deeper meaning to consent.” Then, I thought about how complex this movement has become. Had the #MeToo movement began with all three vague definitions of relationship-based sexual oppression, then perhaps the Babe article would have resonated better. But, it did not, and it is extremely difficult to add onto a social movement when it already is conducted so smoothly.

I regret to inform you that in the 5 years of my life I spent studying social rights in the United States and abroad, I learned that social movements are extremely disappointing. We want to yell and scream about everything that is wrong in the world, but the more we do so, the more passion we emulate into a social movement, the more complex we make it and the weaker we make it.

If you have faced any kind of relationship-based sexual oppression, please seek help. Even if you did not say no, if you are left feeling uncomfortable in any way, then please seek help. Below are some great resources.

National Center for Victims of Crime: National Hotlines and Helpful Links

Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network: Centers Near You 

Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network: National Sexual Assault Hotline 

Feminist Majority Foundation: Sexual Assault State Hotlines 

 

‘Dinner Table Talk’

Your political identity begins with your parents, whether you agree with them or not.

I was seven years old sitting at the dinner table with my family, pushing the vegetables around my plate while my parents argued about ‘grown-up things’ that my child’s mind could not yet process. They argued about familiar words with foreign meanings to me, like economy and immigration. Fifteen years later, I find myself discussing the same words with passion, but at times I hear my parents’ voices as I debate with my peers.

My father taught me at the dinner table that the money I make is mine, and I should be free to do with it as I please; but it was my mother who taught me that I should be charitable with my wealth, and it’s okay if the government decides that for me. When my father yelled at my brother for punching one of my classmates on the school bus after he made sex jokes at my underdeveloped body, I learned to ignore sexist comments; but I also learned to fight back when my mother told my brother that he did the right thing. It was at my dinner table where I became passionate about social justice, where I had an outlet to display my own educated opinions, and where I became a liberal.

Which makes me wonder, what kind of people are the children of Trump supporters going to be when they grow up?

What is the future for our daughters when there are children hearing their parents agree that sexual assault dialogue is ‘locker room talk’? Throughout his campaign, Donald Trump has targeted female reporters who present an opposing opinion to his, stating they are too unattractive for the job and entices his supporters to show aggression towards them. In addition to this behavior, he has a history of degrading comments towards the weight of celebrity women including Rosie O’Donnell, Kim Kardashian, and Miss Universe Alicia Machado. Trump’s running mate Mike Pence is just as guilty of this misogynistic speech. The Indiana governor has stated that working women stunt the emotional growth of children and wrote that women are too inferior and incompetent to be in the military. At first, I thought these comments would cause approval ratings for these candidates to drop significantly, but then I saw the trending Twitter hashtag #repealthe19th. After a graph was released of an electoral map of the United States comparing women’s votes to men’s votes, many Trump supporters lashed out with rage about how women should not have the right to vote because they tend to vote liberal.

Imagine a livid Trump supporter at the dinner table exhibiting his rage about this new statistic. Ask yourself, what kind of person is he making his son into?

Not only are women under fire by Trump’s campaign, Muslims and Mexicans are also in his crosshairs. There are nearly 2 billion Muslims across the globe, and Trump has promised to bar this chunk of the population from entering the country. Hate crimes against Muslims rose dramatically in 2015 and continue to escalate, without a doubt a direct result of Trump’s Islamophobic banter. There is a difference between creating a platform based on fighting extremist terrorist organizations, and denouncing the humanity of American citizens based on which god they pray to inside the walls of their own home. Trump, however, cannot separate the two, increasing a dangerous and violent Islamophobic mindset. While the GOP nominee wants to prevent Muslims from entering the country, he also has made blatantly fallacious remarks towards Mexicans and Latinos. Currently, there are about 33.7 million Mexicans and Americans of Mexican descent living in the United States. He used to call Alicia Machado “Miss Housekeeping” because of her Latina heritage, corroborating the racist notion that Latinos are house cleaners and gardeners. Latinos in America hold many prestigious, hard-earned jobs, including Mexican-American judge Gonzalo Curiel, who Trump declared gave unfair rulings because of his heritage.

Imagine the Trump supporters who beat up a homeless Latino man, who Trump branded as ‘passionate,’ sitting around the dinner table boasting of what they did. Will their children grow up to be just as violent and racist?

Children look up to their parents and see their heroes, and at the dinner table they sit quietly, they listen, and they learn about the person they will become. While we cannot stop every household’s dangerous dinner table talk, we can stop Donald Trump on November 8th by doing our civic duty and voting.

Stop Ignoring Third World Terrorism

Earlier this week, explosions set off in the Brussels airport and the city’s subway, causing a veil of upset and a series of remarks similar to the immediate aftermath of the Paris attacks last year. The death toll is currently at 34 dead, with dozens more injured. Not only was this an attack on Belgium, it was an attack on the Western world and the entirety of Europe. The globe is in shock; European leaders have made an oath to do whatever necessary to end Islamic State induced terrorism. Airport and transit security has heightened worldwide out of fear of who might be next. However, the First World should fear what ISIS and ISIL are doing in the Third World.

Here is a brief list of some of the atrocities these extremist groups have conducted:

Bamako, Mali – November 20, 2015. A group of al-Qaeda militants took 170 people taken hostage, killing 20 and wounding 7.

Tunis, Tunisia – November 24, 2015. A suicide bomber linked to the Islamic State killed 13 people on a bus full of Tunisian presidential guards.

Istanbul, Turkey – January 12, 2016. Syrian ISIS follower and suicide bomber Nabil Fadli targeted a touristic spot in Istanbul, killing 13 travellers and injuring 14.

Jakarta, Indonesia – January 14, 2016. An unknown number of ISIS assailants conducted suicide bombings and shootings, killing 4 and wounding 24.

Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso – January 15, 2016. A group of al-Qaeda militants took 170 hostages in the Splendid Hotel. There were 30 casualties and 56 wounded. Some of the assailants escaped.

Ankara, Turkey – February 17, 2016. Buses were attacked via car bomb during rush hour by Kurdish Freedom Fighters. 29 were killed and 60 were injured. The Kurdish group claimed to have targeted Turkish military forces.

Mogadishu, Somalia – February 26, 2016. A group of al-Shabbah militants killed 15 and wounded dozens. The attack was conducted by a suicide bomber and four gunmen at the SYL hotel.

Grand-Bassam, Côte d’Ivoire – March 13, 2016. A group linked to al-Qaeda stormed the Grand-Bassam resort, killing 18 and injuring 33. Some of the assailants escaped.

Ankara, Turkey – March 13, 2016. Another attack in Ankara by the Kurdish Freedom Fighters resulted in the death of 37 people and 127 injured with a bombing in a large transportation hub.

Maiduguri, Nigeria – March 16, 2016. Two suicide bombers affiliated with Boko Haram killed 24 at a mosque during prayer. The mosque had just reopened after an attack in October.

Why are we ignoring these atrocities? The Islamic State has declared a holy war on the Western World, however, ISIS/ISIL has affected more than just Europe and the United States. The Third World is more susceptible to corruption and extremism than modern and more developed countries. According to The Hunger Project, around 896 million people earn under $1.90 a day in developing countries. In many of these cases, the income disparity is deeply rooted in government corruption. Oil, diamonds, and other various industries have created an outrageous wealth gap between the elite and commonfolk in the Middle East and Africa. People who have nothing tend to have a greater focus on their sacred values, which are “values that are held so deeply that people are not willing to compromise on them” (Jeffrey Ginges). Sacred values can be religion, family, traditions, political beliefs, and so on. When an outside factor removes a group of people’s sacred value, the world soon faces terrorism. Something was removed from the terrorists’ lives prior to forming the organization when they already had nothing, so they channel their unrelenting and undiminishable anger into the only thing that sparked any hope during the darkest of days: religion. In situations where economic hardships and crime have shattered society, many turn to religion to provide hope for a better tomorrow.

The Western World has negatively impacted the Middle East and Africa throughout the course of history. In medieval times, the inhabitants of the Middle East were disregarded by powerful monarchs who hungered for control of the Eastern trade routes. Africa was colonized by imperialistic leaders and the indigenous were massacred, enslaved, and forced off their lands. These are only two examples of the history of atrocities that the white man has brought onto these people. Although these are historic examples, they set up an environment of hatred towards Western civilizations as countries in the Middle East and Africa developed.

Not everyone in developing countries is hateful of the West, however. Many have chosen to embrace the world through education and culture, and many have chosen to live independent of world affairs. These are the people who extremist groups are targeting in the Third World. Boko Haram in Africa is a subset of ISIL and was labeled by the Global Terrorism Index as one of the deadliest terrorist groups in the world. Following the slogan, “Western education is forbidden,” Boko Haram abducts schoolchildren, carries out mass killings, and disrupts peaceful lands. If Boko Haram kills every educated person in the region, the remaining residents will be easily subjected to joining the terrorist group. Not only is the number of murdered increasing, the amount of Boko Haram sympathizers has skyrocketed since its creation in 2002.

Terrorism conducted by Boko Haram only made top news headlines during the abduction of 276 schoolgirls in Chibok, Nigeria. The hashtag #BringBackOurGirls was created and the globe was outraged for about two weeks. When al-Qaeda attacked the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris on January 7th, 2015, news outlets covered the attack for weeks. The chart below portrays the interest in Charlie Hebdo compared to the interest in Boko Haram; the chart also includes the lesser known Boko Haram attack in Baga, Nigeria, where over 150 were massacred over the course of four days from January 3rd to 7th, 2015. 

Source: Google Trends

 

Why are we avoiding the discussion of terrorism in the Third World? The answer is clear. The Middle East has a history of violence and poverty. Africa is a grossly underdeveloped continent. This kind of stuff just happens there. The media has normalized terrorism in the Third World, but the more we ignore it, the stronger these organizations get. We should be wary of what terrorist groups are doing in underdeveloped nations, because it is in these places that ISIS and ISIL have recruited thousands of members willing to give their lives and take many more for their beliefs.

 

Read more about by Jeffrey Ginges and about Neuroscience and Social Conflict here.

 

The Never-Ending Clinton Campaign

Hillary Clinton is stuck in a permanent campaign. Despite the results of the 2016 presidential election, it is likely that the powerful female politician will continue to do what she does best: talk about herself. Her self-referential in the media has caused the democratic candidate to receive critique stating she is narcissistic and conceited. Perhaps all this I-talk is Clinton’s attempt to cover up her negative past with the media, specifically the email scandal and Benghazi. Former Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal developed the theory of the permanent campaign, describing how campaigning has become a style of governing. Politicians must take part in the permanent campaign to convince constituents of their credibility and resell their name.

Blumenthal has a theory that the permanent campaign is the permanent cure, which is essentially the idea that campaigning can solve a politician’s past failures. This can be seen in Hillary Clinton’s presidential election that has been ongoing since January of 2007. Clinton took a heavy blow at the Iowa Caucus in 2008; not only did she lose to President Barack Obama, but even John Edwards gained more votes than Clinton. This major roadblock did not stop the Clinton army, as the team headed to New Hampshire with energy despite the media’s negative coverage of her. Clinton won the popular vote in New Hampshire, but Obama ultimately received the nomination and Clinton lost her first presidential opportunity. Could Hillary’s self-campaigning cost her the nomination? Despite her negative presence in many media outlets, the one thing no reporter can say about Hillary is that she is a quitter; the Clinton name was to be praised once again. After she failed to get the nomination in 2008, Clinton was selected to be Obama’s secretary of state. This put the Clinton name in the Arkansas Governor’s office, the New York State Senate, the White House, and now the State Department. Hillary may not have won the presidential bid, but in a way, the ambitious politician still made progress in her lifelong campaign.

After making a few million dollars off some speeches and publishing a few books about herself, Hillary Clinton announced that she is yet again pursuing an expensive and heavily covered campaign for presidency. This unsurprising presidential announcement publicly started her campaign that truly began 8 years prior. Now, Hillary fails to gain the trust of many voters. The lack of support and faith in the Clinton family could very well be a result of a campaign driven on the words, ‘me, myself, and I.’ Her presidential announcement contained entirely ‘me’ statements and not a single ‘we’ statement. (See below for a comparison with Obama ‘08 and Paul ’16, courtesy of Gregory Ferenstein). From one perspective, this campaign could be seen as a way to ‘clean up’ the past. After all, Hillary is carrying the weight of 16 years of combative relations between the Clinton name and the media.

Given her White House experience, Clinton without a doubt is one of the most qualified candidates in this election to hold office, however she has completely lost the constituency’s faith and trust. Over the past 9 months, Clinton has faced an email scandal and the Benghazi hearings. As a result of both of these detrimental issues, she continues to campaign and tries to convince voters that she is a legitimate candidate who will succeed in the oval office. Clinton’s campaign heavily targets young adults and students, perhaps in hopes that the younger generation is unaware of her doubtful history. Even if Clinton loses the election, I predict she will continue to campaign for her own public approval, regardless if she is running for office or not. After all, she has been in a permanent campaign since her soon-to-be husband Bill Clinton ran for congress in 1974. Who knows what Clinton will campaign for next, maybe we will see Hillary justify that she is indeed a human after all and start a billion dollar campaign about why she is your friend.