Instagram / Snoop Dogg / USWNT

Studies have shown that men who have daughters are more likely to support women's rights. CEOs with daughter are more aware of the problems women face in the workplace, and a 2011 study of Danish companies found they're more likely to close the gender wage gap.

One man whose daughter has played a role in his championing of women's rights? Snoop Dogg. The rapper posted a video on Instagram highlighting the inequality that the U.S. women's soccer team is currently facing, and he did it in the most endearingly Snoop Dogg way.

"Food for thought: Shout out to the USA women's soccer team for their fourth World Cup, but what I want to talk about is they only get $90,000 per player, but the men, if they win it they get $500,000 per player," he said in the video. "Sorry-ass [expletive] men from the US soccer team ain't ever won [expletive], ain't gonna ever win [expletive], can't even get out of the [expletive] first round."

Keep Reading Show less
Culture
Photo by T. Chick McClure on Unsplash.

You think you know someone pretty well when you spend years with them, but, as we've seen time and again, that's not always the case. And though many relationships don't get to a point where the producers of "Who the (Bleep) Did I Marry?" start calling every day just to chat, the reality is that sometimes partners will reveal shocking things even after you thought you'd been all shocked out.

That's the case for one woman whose Reddit thread has recently gone viral. The 25-year-old, who's been with her boyfriend for five years, took to a forum for relationship advice to ask if it was normal that her seemingly cool and loving boyfriend recently revealed women shouldn't have a fundamental right. (And no, it's not abortion — although there are a lot of "otherwise best ever boyfriends" out there who want to deny women the rights to bodily autonomy, too.)

Keep Reading Show less
Recommended
Hulu/YouTube (back) FFRF/Twitter (fore)

It's only been a handful of weeks since Alabama legislators signed into law a bill that criminalizes almost all abortions and a mere couple of months since an Alabama judge heard a case in which a fetus was legally recognized as a co-plaintiff in a "wrongful death" abortion suit.

Opponents warned of the dangerous precedent being set because of what such legal actions could mean for miscarriage or other fetal deaths. Now we're seeing that precedent being played out in real time.

Here's the story:

Marshae Jones, 27, was five months pregnant in December of 2018 when she got into an altercation with Ebony Jemison, 23. The two were allegedly fighting over the father of Jones's baby.

Jones initiated the fight—that part of the story is not in dispute. During the fight, Jemison, reportedly in an act of self-defense, pulled out her gun and shot Jones in the stomach, resulting in the baby in utero's death.

Jemison, the shooter, was not indicted. A grand jury found she was acting in self-defense.


Instead, Jones—the pregnant woman—was indicted for manslaughter. Not assault for fighting with Jemison, but manslaughter for the death of her own fetus.

Just to reiterate, an unarmed, 5-month pregnant woman was shot in the stomach after getting into a fight, lost her baby, and she's the one who was indicted for manslaughter.

That is seriously messed up, Alabama.

But what's even more messed up are the number of people I've seen defending this ruling. "She shouldn't have started a fight," people say. "When you're pregnant, the safety of your baby should be your first priority." "She was being irresponsible and putting her baby at risk."

Here's the problem with those arguments:

There are a million things that can go wrong in a pregnancy without a pregnant person ever doing a darn thing. And there are accidents that can affect a pregnancy without there being any malicious or negligent intent whatsoever. When we start to hold pregnant women legally responsible for the viability of their pregnancies, we start down a terrifying path.


What about the mom who wears socks while walking down her wood steps, slips and falls, and loses her pregnancy? Will she be indicted for manslaughter because of her reckless behavior of wearing socks on a slippery floor?

What about the mom who eats some brie not knowing there's any risk for pregnant women, gets listeria, and loses her baby? Will she be indicted for negligent homicide?

What about the mom who is in an abusive relationship and is too afraid to leave? If her partner beats her up and the baby dies, does she get indicted for manslaughter because she stayed?

What about the mom who gets into a fight with her husband and he shoots her in the stomach? Imagine indicting the mother for manslaughter in that scenario.

How about the mom who keeps getting pregnant despite having multiple miscarriages? Will she be indicted for losing those pregnancies because she knows her body might not be a safe place for a baby?

What's super scary is that I think there are people out there who would answer yes to some or all of those questions. Even if you believe an embryo or fetus is a full-fledged human being deserving of the same rights and liberties as everyone else, making pregnant women legally culpable when they lose a pregnancy, either by accident or at the hands of another person, is asinine.

This indictment should scare the crap out of all of us. No one forced Jemison to fire that gun. She can claim self-defense and avoid being indicted herself, and that's fine. Charge Jones with assault; that's fine too. But to indict a pregnant woman for manslaughter because someone else shot her in the stomach? No. That's just a slippery slope into Handmaid's Tale levels of control over pregnant women that I simply can't comprehend.


The Handmaid's Tale: Season 3 Teaser (Super Bowl Commercial) www.youtube.com

Culture

In the Oct. 23 issue of The New Yorker, it was reported that President Donald Trump likes to joke about Vice President Mike Pence's long history of anti-LGBTQ views.

In Jane Mayer's exquisite story "The Danger of President Pence," a source shared that Trump likes to remind Pence who's in charge and frequently mocks his commitment to religion (Pence is an evangelical Christian). Specifically, he jokes about Pence's need to limit the rights of women and LGBTQ people. Here's the excerpt from Mayer's story (emphasis mine):

"Two sources also recalled Trump needling Pence about his views on abortion and homosexuality. During a meeting with a legal scholar, Trump belittled Pence’s determination to overturn Roe v. Wade. The legal scholar had said that, if the Supreme Court did so, many states would likely legalize abortion on their own. 'You see?' Trump asked Pence. 'You’ve wasted all this time and energy on it, and it’s not going to end abortion anyway.' When the conversation turned to gay rights, Trump motioned toward Pence and joked, 'Don’t ask that guy — he wants to hang them all!'"

There's nothing wrong with Pence being a man of faith. But when he hides behind it and uses it as justification for a series of policies and positions that threaten the livelihoods of many, many Americans, that's dangerous. Furthermore, joking about someone hanging gay people wouldn't be funny at a bus stop or in a locker room. To know Trump thought it would be appropriate to say in a meeting is the very definition of deplorable.

Keep Reading Show less
More