Quantcast
Channel: Sexism
Viewing all 410 articles
Browse latest View live

People are telling Kim Kardashian to 'sit like a lady' in a recent photo — and the comments reveal a concerning pattern of sexism

$
0
0

kim kardashian kkw beauty pop up

  • Kim Kardashian West recently posted a photo of herself sitting casually on a countertop.
  • Many Instagram commenters focused on her suggestive caption, which recalled the longstanding myth that drinking pineapple juice can help make your vagina smell and taste sweeter.
  • But many others bashed the position of Kardashian West's body, telling her to "sit like a lady" and "close your legs."
  • These comments are disturbingly sexist and go beyond typical mom-shaming.

It's rare for Kim Kardashian West to post a photo on Instagram without receiving backlash. Some of that backlash is warranted, such as the criticism of her Fulani braids or extremely questionable sponsored content. But some is simply unwarranted — or, at its worst, grossly sexist.

Most recently, Kardashian West caught flak for posting a photo of herself sitting casually on a countertop, holding a can of pineapple juice.

Google the benefits of pineapple juice 🍍

A post shared by Kim Kardashian West (@kimkardashian) on Jul 7, 2018 at 9:44pm PDT on

The suggestive caption — "google the benefits of pineapple juice"— recalled the longstanding myth that drinking pineapple juice can help make your vagina taste sweeter (for which the evidence is purely anecdotal). This is especially true for fans of "Keeping Up with the Kardashians," who may remember a spinoff episode that featured Kardashian West and her sisters testing this theory with a "smell-off."

But while some commenters certainly focused on the caption's implications, many others decided to engage in body-policing, which aims to critique and control how people — usually women — look in public and how they may express their sexuality.

Kardashian West is no stranger to body-shaming and mom-shaming. Indeed, many of the comments focused on her role as a mother of three ("Keep your clothes on so your children will be proud of their mother and not embarrassed that her body is on display for the world"). But many others arguably went further, saying the photo wasn't "lady-like." 

"Should learn how to sit like a lady acts more like a dog," one person wrote.

"I don't know about you, but I wouldn't let my wife show herself like that. End of story. Can see you aren't raised properly, no morals whatsoever," wrote another.

"Google the benefits of closing your legs," one comment reads.

Many more comments featured the phrase "close your legs," which is a sentiment typically used to shame women who are perceived as sexually free. In other words, it's used to reinforce the misogynistic idea that women should be chaste and pure — or, put gently by the user-edited website Urban Dictionary, "as an insult to slutty/trashy girls."

The double standard present in this commentary is striking. While men and non-binary individuals certainly experience many forms of body-policing, the weight of societal expectations falls largely on female and femme communities. It's worth emphasizing that people of every gender are free to do whatever they like with their own bodies, and a person's sex life has no bearing on their morals or worth as a human. 

At its worst, this type of commentary begets a culture dangerously obsessed with victim-blaming, as was the case with a 2013 sexual assault case in New Zealand. Keith Jefferies, the attorney defending a bouncer at a club who was accused of sexually assaulting a female client, claimed that it was consensual because "all she would have had to do was to close her legs."

Sexist Instagram comments may seem innocuous or harmless, but this mindset has tangibly harmful effects on real people's lives.

Female celebrities, including the Kardashians, are often subject to undue judgment and analysis, especially in the time of social media. But it's important to remember that these harsh online reactions reveal more about our culture than anything else — and that high-profile people have equal worth, agency, and bodily autonomy.

Sign up here to get INSIDER's favorite stories straight to your inbox.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Trump pitched peace to Kim Jong Un with this Hollywood-style video starring Kim as the leading man


People can't stop wondering if Selena Gomez reacted to Justin Bieber's engagement — but everyone's concern is unnecessary and sexist

$
0
0

justin bieber selena gomez

  • Justin Bieber recently announced his engagement to Hailey Baldwin.
  • This took many by surprise, especially considering Bieber's long history with Selena Gomez.
  • Much of the surprise, however, has crossed over into invasive speculation and unnecessary concern for Gomez's wellbeing.
  • Gomez is being inserted into a narrative she didn't ask to be a part of.
  • This is a trend with female celebrities whose exes move on — largely because our society has difficulty recognizing that a woman can be happy alone and, in particular, without a man.


Where were you when you found out Justin Bieber got engaged? Correction: Where were you when you found out Justin Bieber got engaged to someone who is not Selena Gomez? I was minding my own business on the subway while mindlessly scrolling through Instagram. Suddenly, my thumb stopped and hovered over Bieber's Instagram post where he referred to his 21-year-old fiancée Hailey Baldwin as the "love of his life." I immediately sent the post to a handful of friends writing, "Truly speechless." My best friend wrote back, "Doesn't that make you sad for Selena?" My response? "10000000%."

Was gonna wait a while to say anything but word travels fast, listen plain and simple Hailey I am soooo in love with everything about you! So committed to spending my life getting to know every single part of you loving you patiently and kindLY. I promise to lead our family with honor and integrity letting Jesus through his Holy Spirit guide us in everything we do and every decision we make. My heart is COMPLETELY and FULLY YOURS and I will ALWAYS put you first! You are the love of my life Hailey Baldwin and I wouldn’t want to spend it with anybody else. You make me so much better and we compliment eachother so well!! Can’t wait for the best season of life yet!. It’s funny because now with you everything seems to make sense! The thing I am most excited for is that my little brother and sister get to see another healthy stable marriage and look for the same!!! Gods timing really is literally perfect, we got engaged on the seventh day of the seventh month, the number seven is the number of spiritual perfection, it’s true GOOGLE IT! Isn’t that nuts? By the way I didn’t plan that, anyways My goodness does feel good to have our future secured! WERE GONNA BE BETTER AT 70 BABY HERE WE GO! “He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains FAVOR from the Lord!” This is the year of favor!!!!

A post shared by Justin Bieber (@justinbieber) on Jul 9, 2018 at 3:14pm PDT on

Bieb's early music served as the soundtrack to my teen years. Who didn't listen to "One Time" on repeat while wondering how we got so #blessed with this shaggy-haired heartthrob? (OK — maybe a lot of people, but I wasn't one of them.) I fully embraced the pop star who quickly became every teenage girl's dream guy, including a very famous one: Selena Gomez. So, yeah, when I found out Bieber was marrying Baldwin instead of Gomez, I couldn't help but feel bad for Sel. She clearly has a lot of love for her on-again, off-again ex. But isn't it a bit sexist to feel bad for a wildly successful woman just because her ex-boyfriend is marrying another woman? Why does she have to lose just because he wins?

Though I'm not the only person mourning the end of Jelena, nowhere in Bieber's lengthy Instagram post does he mention his ex's name — yet media headlines about Bieber and Baldwin are littered with mentions of Gomez. From a Vogue beauty article that conjectures that Gomez's new hairstyle is because of her ex's engagement to E! News' in-depth feature about why she wasn't the woman for Bieber (sigh), Gomez is being inserted into a narrative she didn't ask to be a part of. Plus, let's not forget these gems of headlines: "Inside Selena Gomez's New Life Without Justin Bieber,""Selena Gomez's Post–Justin Bieber Engagement Makeover Includes New Hair and a Pointed Statement T-Shirt" and the lovely "Fans on Selena Gomez Watch in Wake of Bieber Engagement."

justin bieber selena gomez

Look, I used to work for a celebrity tabloid, so I know the drill. When a big star gets engaged, you immediately check up on their exes and their relationship history. This isn't a new narrative, but it's a tired one. Don't believe me? Just look at what's widely considered to be the most controversial celebrity breakup of all time: Brad and Jen. Flashback to 2005, when Brad Pitt left Jennifer Aniston for his "Mr. & Mrs. Smith" costar, Angelina Jolie: And the reign of Brangelina began.

Of course, a media frenzy ensued after Aniston and Pitt's dramatic split, and fans declared themselves #TeamAniston or #TeamJolie. Everyone felt bad for Aniston, but it was like a car crash — they just couldn't look away. Almost 13 years later, if we're being honest, we still can't look away from Aniston's love life. People say that they want to see the OG girl next door "happy," but that's really code for "coupled." A guy can be single and revered ad infinitum (just look at George Clooney, pre-Amal), but a woman — even a wildly successful and world-famous one, such as Aniston or Gomez — needs a man to openly declare "she's good enough! I'm marrying her!" for the public to not think there's something wrong with her. It's the ugly truth.

That's why when Pitt and Jolie broke up in 2016 after nearly 12 years together, the world collectively gasped before turning to Aniston, waiting patiently for her next move. Was she happy that karma finally caught up to her ex? Did she want to get back together? Just like Gomez, Aniston had nothing to do with her ex's romantic news, yet she was mentioned in article after article. She was a major character in Pitt and Jolie's breakup, even though she was seemingly happily married to actor Justin Theroux.

brad_angie_jen

It didn't matter that Aniston split from Pitt more than a decade ago and had moved on with her life. She was once again the source of speculation due to her ex's love life. Perhaps the most overt sign of this was the New York Post cover that featured a laughing Aniston with the headline, "BRANGELINA 2004–2016." The coverage was so unfair that think pieces started popping up coming to Aniston's defense. Entertainment Tonight published: "Leave Jennifer Aniston Out of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt's Divorce!" Her soon-to-be estranged husband, Theroux, also came to her defense in the press.

After Aniston eventual split from Theroux, in February 2018, the world once again mourned her impending divorce, because God forbid one of the most successful actresses of our time dare to be single and childless. The "Poor Jen" narrative has been so rampant that mainstream media outlets even started calling each other out. Life & Style published an article with the headline "Sorry, Jennifer Aniston! Justin Theroux Is Moving in with Emma Stone" while the Daily Mail wrote, "Why can't Jennifer Aniston find a lasting love?" This type of coverage spurred The Guardian's article, "I'm sick of ‘Poor Jen' sexism on repeat. This is The One Where Aniston Was Just Fine and USA Today's "It's time to leave Jennifer Aniston alone."

Honestly, the likelihood that Aniston cares about her exes' love lives is slim, as is the likelihood that Gomez shed tears over Bieber's engagement to Baldwin. These women haven't inserted themselves into their exes' love lives, so why do we insist on doing it? Jelena came into existence in December 2010 after the young lovebirds were spotted holding hands. In the eight years since, they've broken up multiple times, written songs about each other and dated other people. Their relationship statuses have changed, but one thing has remained the same: the media's obsession with their relationship — and their projection of Gomez's "devastation" every time Bieber starts dating someone else.

A post shared by Sofia Richie (@sofiarichie) on

In 2016, Bieber had a brief romance with Sofia Richie (before her Scott Disick days) and just like now, the media was quick to paint Gomez as "destroyed" by her ex's new relationship. Hollywood Life published an article titled "Selena Gomez Devastated Justin Bieber Is Finally Over Her & Into Sofia Richie," in which they called her "hysterical" and reported that she was "constantly crying." They wrote this even though Gomez had done absolutely nothing to back up these claims… except fall in love with Bieber when she was a teenager.

So I can't help but fear that Gomez is in danger of becoming the Aniston of our generation. She was part of a celebrity power couple. She and Bieber had not just one but several public splits. And now he's moving on while she's still single. But why do we always assume that's a bad thing? Is it so far-fetched to think that Pitt wasn't the one for Aniston, even though they were married? Maybe Gomez and Bieber were first loves, but not forever loves.

I, for one, am tired of the media and the public turning women into victims just because their exes are moving on. As much as we all loved Jelena, their time came and went. So instead of speculating about Gomez's feelings about Bieber's engagement to Baldwin, let's just blast "It Ain't Me" and move on with our lives. Gomez sure is.

Sign up here to get INSIDER's favorite stories straight to your inbox.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's why the US Men's team sucks at soccer

Kourtney Kardashian's boyfriend reportedly wants her to post more 'covered up pictures' — even though he shares similar photos

$
0
0

kourtney kardashian younes bendjima

  • Sources say that Kourtney Kardashian's boyfriend Younes Bendjima has "never liked" her "sexy pictures"— and the couple already broke up once because of it.
  • Two experts told INSIDER that this type of conflict tends to fall along gendered lines, with men generally preferring more privacy in straight relationships.
  • Both experts also noted that for a normal couple, compromise is key. But for a Kardashian, social media is her livelihood.
  • "This would be like her saying to him, 'I just can't handle your boxing. You have to give up boxing.' It would be literally equivalent to that," psychotherapist Matt Lundquist said.


Kourtney Kardashian's recent Instagram posts gave fans the impression that she has been living her best life with her boyfriend, Younes Bendjima. She has, after all, documented herself eating focaccia on a yacht (otherwise known as "the dream"). But as it turns out, Bendjima himself has been feeling very differently about her social media presence.

The 25-year-old boxer recently left a highly questionable comment on a photo of his girlfriend in a bikini: "That's what you need to show to get likes?" Multiple outlets managed to capture screenshots before he deleted it.

While some fans assumed that Bendjima was simply making a joke that didn't quite land, it has since been reported that this is an ongoing conflict in their relationship. In fact, a source told People that Bendjima's disapproval of Kardashian's revealing photos already caused the couple to break up once before.

"He never liked that she posted sexy pictures of herself on social media. He doesn't want his girlfriend to do that. He gets that it's her job, but wants her to post more covered up pictures," the source told People. "He has always had a problem with this."

A separate source told E! News that Kardashian is "frustrated" by her boyfriend's "impulsive" decision to air their laundry in a public forum.

"Younes gets jealous and can be possessive of Kourtney," the source told E!. "When she posts half-naked pictures, he gets very upset. He wants her for himself and doesn't want to share her with the world."

Fans have already pointed out Bendjima's double standard.

Since news of Bendjima's comment began to circulate, his Instagram has become inundated with similar messages.

younes bendjima instagram comments

younes bendjima instagram comments 2

Kardashian fans have made a point to highlight the sexist implications of his attempt to police a woman's body— regardless of his relationship to her — while feeling free to do the same with his own.

Gender dynamics can play a role in a couple's issues with social media.

"There are most certainly double standards about what is expected (or not expected) to be revealed for men versus women," licensed clinical psychologist Dr. Andrea Bonior told INSIDER. "There are different ways of objectifying different genders, and different pressures that come from being male or female — especially in the public eye with an image to protect."

Psychotherapist and Tribeca Therapy founder Matt Lundquist agreed that, while there are certainly exceptions, a straight couple having issues with one person posting or sharing too much can have gendered implications.

"I do think that more often [in straight relationships], women tend to share more and men tend to want the relationship to be more private," Lundquist told INSIDER. "In my experience, I think men are more protective over two kinds of things. There is this cultural tendency of men to be very protective over their relationships with women. But they also tend to want private aspects of the relationship to stay private: conversations, arguments, disagreements."

Ride with U 🌊

A post shared by Kourtney Kardashian (@kourtneykardash) on Jul 3, 2018 at 10:01am PDT on

This trend almost certainly has roots in how women have historically been considered the subordinate sex. After all, married women in the UK were legally seen as property until 1870— and the ongoing debate over reproductive rights demonstrates how misogyny still wields considerable power over female agency.

Bonior — the author of multiple books and host of The Washington Post's weekly live chat about mental health and relationships — noted that "there is danger in the generalization" that straight men tend to be more possessive.

"I'm more interested in individual cases, since every couple is different," she told INSIDER. "But I also think a lot of people would agree with that generalization."

Conflict over social media activity is rather common — but could be indicative of larger issues in a relationship.

"Being that your average person spends hours on their smartphone per day and that much of that time is spent on social media, it can be a magnifying glass that reveals and worsens other relationship problems, such as flirtation, bragging, privacy intrusions, differences in social lives, different priorities in terms of flashiness and consumerism," Bonior told INSIDER. "It's almost like social media activity can be an umbrella that encapsulates many different potential conflicts."

Lundquist also noted that "issues of vulnerability and issues with trust" could manifest in arguments about social media — or, more generally, arguments about one partner over-sharing.

Both Bonior and Lundquist said that communication and understanding are key to navigating these issues.

"They're either going to have to find a place to meet on this — whether it's one partner moves fully to the other partner's vision, or they meet somewhere in the middle — or at some point, it's going to blow up," Lundquist told INSIDER. "I would encourage them to both be very curious about the other person's position and to get close to a better understanding of why social media is so important to her and why it's so aversive to him."

For Bendjima and Kardashian — whose job is to share her life with the world — this could be a deal-breaker.

Lundquist stressed that there is no "objective" or "right" answer when a person is uncomfortable with their partner's social media activity. But he also acknowledged that when that partner is a Kardashian, it's a different situation.

Stars of the Kardashian-Jenner clan have built their fame and cultivated specific brands by sharing their personal lives with the public. Each member of the family can make upwards of $200,000 for each sponsored Instagram post, according to Forbes.

"Her job is to chronicle her entire existence on social media and in traditional media. One does have to ask, why did he pick this person to date?" Lundquist said. "[Bendjima] needs to spend some time thinking about what he wants in a partner."

Indeed, the source told E! News that Bendjima "wants to be able to deal with this side of Kourtney's life and knows he needs to accept it if they are going to be together."

If he can't, however, Lundquist believes that this "may be a deal-breaker."

"There are certain things that I think can be points of disagreement in a relationship and go a long time without being resolved and without much consequence, but this is one of those things that doesn't just go away," Lundquist told INSIDER. "This couple is not going to make it unless we get some kind of deus ex machina revelation and all of a sudden discover that he's fine with it. Otherwise, this couple is going to be broken up by Labor Day. It's just not sustainable."

"Spoiler alert, Kourtney Kardashian is not giving up sexy photos on Instagram. That's just not happening. So [Bendjima] is going to have to decide whether or not he's okay with that," he continued. "This would be like her saying to him, 'I just can't handle your boxing. You have to give up boxing.' It would be literally equivalent to that."

For more great stories, head to INSIDER's homepage.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: North Korean defector: Kim Jong Un 'is a terrorist'

The rise of the gig economy could strengthen the 'invisible advantage' men have at work

$
0
0

woman tech computer laptop work

  • In a 2016 poll, 24% of Americans reported earning money from gig economy platforms. 
  • But such employment comes at a cost. 
  • The rise of the gig economy may just be further perpetuating male stereotypes.


Martin Schneider often got things done faster than a female colleague, Nicole Hallberg, who worked at the same small employment services agency. He figured this was because of his extra experience.

One day, however, a client suddenly began acting "impossible," "rude" and "dismissive," as Schneider recalled in a series of tweets.

He soon realized why. Schneider had inadvertently used Hallberg's email signature in his messages to the client. (They used a shared inbox.) When he told the client he was actually Martin and not Nicole, there was "immediate improvement" in the exchange.

Intrigued, Schneider and Hallberg agreed to do an experiment in which they switched email signatures for two weeks. What happened? Hallberg had the "most productive week of her career." Meanwhile, Schneider was in "hell" as clients condescended and questioned everything he suggested.

Summing up the lesson, Schneider tweeted: "I wasn't any better at the job than she was, I just had this invisible advantage."

Sexism in the workplace

In many ways, the result of their experiment should not come as a surprise.

Sexism in the workplace is well documented in surveys and in academic literature. Recent reports of overt harassment in the private and public sectors confirm that it is alive and well. Further, the data show persistent gender gaps in pay, hiring and promotions across occupations and skill levels.

My own research looks at how the burgeoning gig economy – in which jobs are short-term or freelance rather than permanent – affects gender and other forms of labor discrimination. A study we recently conducted with colleagues at the Center for Distributive, Labor and Social Studies in Argentina suggests an increasingly freelance workforce may make the problem of male privilege even worse.

Maria and José

Discrimination in the labor market is notoriously difficult to study.

For decades, social scientists have tried to disentangle differences in ability, career preferences, attitudes towards risk and negotiation and other worker characteristics from true discrimination by employers. However, as economic transactions increasingly migrate to peer-to-peer platforms, this perspective misses an important piece of the discrimination puzzle: that of the interactions between gender of the employer and gender of the job seeker.

For example: Do gender stereotypes also put women at a disadvantage when they're the ones doing the hiring? Are women less likely to negotiate salaries and promotions with a male employer?

To answer these questions, we designed the following experiment: We randomly selected and invited 2,800 freelancers on Nubelo, a large online platform for short-term job contracts based in Spain that's now part of Freelancer.com, to apply for a job to transcribe and edit an hourlong marketing video.

Each invitation came from the same employer, a fictitious marketing services agency. Half of the freelancers (randomly selected) received the email from "Maria," while the rest learned about the job opportunity from "José." In addition, half of the invitations asked freelancers to name their price for the job, while the other half offered a flat pay of €250 (US$301).

Male privilege at work

The results confirmed our intuition: Male privilege not only hurts women when they're looking for work, it also puts them at a disadvantage when they're the ones doing the hiring.

In our study, José was able to solicit significantly lower rates from prospective job candidates than Maria, even though the work was identical. Candidates offered to do the job for an average of €124 when José sent the invitation, while they demanded €158 from Maria (or about 27% more for the same exact job).

When we control for differences in the characteristics of the job seekers, such as experience and reputation on the site, the female employer penalty remains essentially unchanged. More interestingly, this result obtained for both male and female job seekers.

Were women less willing to negotiate with José or Maria? Not in our study. In fact we found no statistically significant differences in negotiation preferences across our four employer-freelancer combinations. Female freelancers were just as likely as men to respond to our email when it invited them to name their price, and it made no difference whether the email came from Maria or José.

In other words, as long as the rules of the game are clearly laid out (that freelancers should name their price), female job applicants were willing to bargain as much as male applicants, and the gender of the other party (the employer) did not seem to affect this result.

Rise of the gig economy

uber headquarters sf

An increasing number of people make a living in the gig economy. In a 2016 poll, 24% of Americans reported earning money from gig economy platforms, and the majority said that this income is important or essential to make ends meet. In this context, what are the implications of our findings?

Some claim the rise of "alternative work" arrangements could offer opportunities for women to close the remaining labor market gaps. Our results suggest a more uncertain future. On the one hand, they indicate that women may gain from workplace environments in which the rules of bargaining are unambiguous, as studies show that men often have the upper hand when the rules are less clear.

On the other, our results suggest that the gig economy could potentially exacerbate gender discrimination. In the hypercompetitive, fast-paced world of online labor, hiring and wages are determined on the basis of little verifiable information about each individual worker. These conditions favor the activation of stereotypes about "appropriate" jobs for women, their productivity and their willingness to bargain. Further, as traditional worker-employer relations are replaced by peer-to-peer transactions on a global scale, the application of anti-discrimination labor law becomes challenging.

As we look at the impact of technology on the future of work, there are some reasons for optimism but plenty for concern. The truth is, while technology extends our capabilities as human beings, it can not, unfortunately, eliminate our biases and prejudices.

SEE ALSO: Here's how to prepare for your financial future if you work in the gig economy

DON'T MISS: Businesses wanting to hire millennials should look to the gig economy

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why the World Cup soccer ball looks so different

Some guy made a sexist 46-minute cut of 'The Last Jedi' by editing out the women — and it's awful

$
0
0

laura dern star wars the last jedi

This post includes spoilers for "Star Wars: The Last Jedi."

An apparent "Star Wars" fan who's fed up with "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" edited the movie to reduce the role of women.

The result is a semi-coherent 46-minute film that erases the entire role of resistance admiral Amilyn Holdo, played by Laura Dern, and kills off Princess Leia, played by Carrie Fisher, early in the film. It's also racist, severely curtailing the role of the character who the editor calls "Asian chick," presumably Kelly Marie Tran, who plays Rose Tico in the movie.

The anonymous fan posted a torrent file for the edited movie to The Pirate Bay on Sunday, titling it "The Last Jedi: De-Feminized Fanedit (aka The Chauvinist Cut)" and describing it as "basically The Last Jedi minus Girlz Powah and other silly stuff." It's cut from an illegal camera recording of the movie from a movie theater, the user wrote in the torrent description.

rey luke skywalker

The new edit of the movie is part of a sexist and racist backlash towards "The Last Jedi" by "Star Wars" fans who resent that a woman, Rey, is at the center of Disney's new trilogy. Following the movie's release, members of the Alt-Right took credit for organizing a wave of negative attention toward the movie.

Among the changes, Luke Skywalker's character is modified so he starts training Rey immediately, instead of "whining" at first, and doesn't drink green milk. The editor cuts out "most shots showing female fighters/pilots and female officers commanding people around/having ideas." And Leia "never scolds, questions nor demotes Poe," who eventually carries out the kamikaze attack instead of Admiral Holdo, who's cut out of the edit.

Furthermore, Kylo Ren kills Leia and kills most of Snoke's guards, while Rey struggles with a single one, and there's "no bomber heroism by china girl in the beginning."

rose the last jedi

The editor of the "De-Feminized Fanedit" concedes the brief runtime isn't ideal, but stands behind it.

"You will probably enjoy it most when you view it less as a blockbuster movie and more as some kind of episode from some non-existent mediocre Star Wars series," they wrote. "But for what it's worth, it can now at least be viewed without feeling nauseous about most of the terrible big and small decisions they made in this film."

Since the news site Pedestrian wrote an article about the edit on Monday, fans of "The Last Jedi" have taken to Twitter to mock it as the work of a "men's rights activist" or "MRA."

Many of them mocked the man for editing a film to reflect his own lonely life devoid of female companionship.

Another referred to the video as "the first movie in history that actually gives its viewers cooties."

Others simply pointed out how ridiculous the project is.

Even "The Last Jedi" director Rian Johnson chimed in — even if only to laugh at the guy.

Here's a full list of changes the editor said were made in "The Last Jedi: De-Feminized Fanedit," with typos perserved:

- No whiny/reluctant/murderous psycho Luke. He does tell his story, but that's it. In the beginning of the movie, he has already started to train Rey, no convincing needed.
- No green milk.
- Cut out most shots showing female fighters/pilots and female officers commanding people around/having ideas.
- NO HALDO! She simply doesn't exist. Her whole subplot doesn't exist. The Kamikaze is carried out by Poe. ( = Poe dies.)
- Leia never scolds, questions nor demotes Poe. He is a respected and very skilled high-ranking member of the resistance.
- Lea dies. Kylo kills her.
- Kylo is more badass and much less conflicted and volatile, for example he does not smash his helmet. Luke did not try to murder him, he chose for himself.
- Snoke disappears after he is "killed", leaving a reverb laughter (could be done better, but was lazy).
- Kylo takes on more of Snoke's guards, Rey struggles with a single one.
- No bomber heroism by china girl in the beginning.
- No Canto Bight. ( = No weird goggled alien woman during union dispute.)
- No superpowered Rey. She does get to show off a little bit of skill, because she is now shown to already be in training in the beginning of the movie. Interestingly, with these edits she now seems more graceful and real to me, that I almost like her as a character. She still saves the people in the end.
- Less Porg nonsense.
- Luke is not a semi-force-ghost and is smashed by the first laser cannon shot. (sorry, I just had to!)
- When Rey and Kylo fight for the lightsaber, Rey flies away, Kylo remains standing. (there is no footage showing how she gets away, unfortunately - maybe with deleted scenes someday? My idea was that Kylo has mercy and lets her get away)
- No force-connection between Kylo and Rey. Was kinda pointless. (Though now there's no good explanation why she goes on Snoke's ship. Let's say she wants to save Finn.)
- Wookie eats the Porg, or at least isn't interrupted in trying to do so.
- No Rey beating up Luke. (obviously)
- No Yoda.
- No Jedi archives.
- Rey does not force-grab Kylo's lightsaber. One of the many things that made him look like a weakling.
- The Keymaster is now simply some random guy from the crew who isn't really important or even introduced.
- Phasma is finished after the first blow by Finn. (Women are naturally weaker than men, she isn't force-sensitive, and we know nothing about any exo-skeleton in her suit)
- Finn's final sacrifice would have been awesome, but it was ruined by the Asian chick, so the whole sequence was dropped.
- Asian chick speaks less, doesn't bully Finn, Finn doesn't try to escape, she is never formally introduced. She is just there and occasionally smiles at Finn or screams "Finn!". She has no sister. Serves her right for all the heinous stuff she did.
- "General Leia's" is censored from the intro "General Leia's resistance fighters". It's just "resistance fighters" now.
- Lots of little cuts reducing the number of female facial shots. Too many to count. (Pun intended.)
- For example, when there's a scene where a woman is cut in making some important statement that can be substituted by another statement by a guy, then she gets cut out. Works pretty well actually.
- Quite a few scenes rearranged so that the flow of the shortened movie is still somewhat coherent.

Sign up here to get INSIDER's favorite stories straight to your inbox.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I tried the newest BlackBerry phone for a week

This artist recreated sexist ads from the 1950s with the gender roles reversed

$
0
0

sexist ads rug

  • Eli Rezkallah is a 31-year-old visual artist and photographer.
  • He took mid-20th-century advertisements and recreated them with modern themes.
  • Rezkallah reversed the sexist gender roles in the ads.

Whether attempting to sell clothing, coffee, or food, vintage ads from the mid-20th century were often riddled with sexism, forcing women into deeming gender roles. Now, however, a Lebanon-based artist has changed these out-of-date ads: Eli Rezkallah.

Rezkallah, a 31-year-old visual artist and photographer, recently gained attention for his photo series, "In a Parallel Universe." In each photo, Rezkallah took a vintage advertising and recreated it entirely, reversing the gender roles in it.

parallel univer 91772

parallel univer 91774

An ad for Ketchup that originally read "You mean a woman can open it?" now features a picture of a male model and reads "You mean a man can open it?" Another ad for coffee with the headline "If your husband ever finds out," showing a man spanking a woman on his lap is now titled "If your wife ever finds out" and shows a wife spanking her husband on her lap.

sexist ad beer

In an interview with South West News Service (SWNS) regarding "In a Parallel Universe," Rezkallah explained, "I was visiting my family in New Jersey and I overheard my uncles talk about how women are better off cooking, taking care of the kitchen, and fulfilling 'their womanly duties.'

"Although I know that not all men like my uncles think that way I was surprised to learn that some still do," Rezkallah added.

He also shared with the outlet his hopes for the project as a whole, saying, "I hope that people who are stuck in stereotypical gender roles imposed by patriarchal societies will be able to visually see the cracks in the limitation that those roles carry through this project."

sexist ads ties

Rezkallah, who was born in Beirut, Lebanon, is also the founder and creative director of Plastik Magazine and Plastik Studios, which opened in 2007. His work has been viewed and displayed internationally and often is focused on art that compares beauty with themes that are more off-putting and contradictory.

For more of Rezkallah's work, visit www.elirezkallah.com or follow him on Instagram.

Sign up here to get INSIDER's favorite stories straight to your inbox.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: North Korean defector: Kim Jong Un 'is a terrorist'

What the CEO of Barstool Sports says to people who call the site 'sexist'

$
0
0

erika nardini

  • Erika Nardini is the CEO of Barstool Sports, a digital media company valued at $100 million.
  • Barstool Sports is often controversial, and some have called it sexist.
  • Asked about her response to that claim, Nardini said the site is "intentionally not PC" and "our guys just want to do things that are funny."



Barstool Sports is a somewhat controversial website. The digital-media company, which was recently valued at $100 million, is known for its coverage of news, sports, and girls.

Recently, ESPN dropped Barstool Sports' TV show after one episode, after star anchor Samantha Ponder tweeted screenshots from Barstool articles published three years earlier that made sexist remarks about her.

On an episode of Business Insider's podcast, "Success! How I Did It," Barstool Sports' CEO, Erika Nardini, shared with US editor-in-chief, Alyson Shontell, her response to criticism of Barstool Sports' approach: "I think it's very convenient to say that Barstool is sexist."

For one, she said, "it's very convenient to judge the past by today's standards." Nardini — who said she doesn't get involved with the editorial side of the business — said Barstool Sports' content has undergone an "evolution" in that it doesn't make those kinds of sexist comments anymore.

"This is a company that intentionally is not PC," she added. "At our core, our guys just want to do things that are funny and that's what I'm focused on and that's what I believe in."

Regarding the ESPN show controversy specifically, Nardini said she and Portnoy agreed that if the whole debacle were to unfold again, they'd make the same choices: "Morale at Barstool Sports — I don't think has ever been as high as the day after that was canceled."

Nardini added: "If I came into Barstool apologizing for every time Barstool offended someone over the last 14 years, I basically would not do anything else in my job, but I don't believe in that."

Read Nardini's full response to criticism that the site is sexist here, from Business Insider's podcast:

"I spent much of last year thinking about distribution and what would Barstool look like and sound like and do on other people's air, whether that was a digital company or social network like Facebook or a comedy channel like 'Comedy Central' or sports channel like ESPN. We spent eight months working that ESPN partnership, and I poured myself into that. It was uncomfortable along the way. Culturally, Barstool and ESPN are just very, very different. I think there are great people at both companies, but ultimately it was an uncomfortable partnership. I think that what's unfortunate about what happened is that it was never about the show, and the show itself was great. That was heartbreaking.

"Dave and I were talking about it last night, oddly. We both agreed that if it were all to play out again, would we have done it? We both said yes. The reason I say yes is that morale at Barstool Sports — I don't think has ever been as high as the day after that was canceled, and everyone came together, and I think I've never seen anything like the Stoolies and what they did to rally around the 'Pardon My Take' guys and around Barstool at large.

"In terms of the controversy, I think ESPN has some challenges, and one of the challenges is that they have super-empowered talent. Sam had a three-year grudge and she played it and played it well. I don't think that you can change the past, and if I came into Barstool apologizing for every time Barstool offended someone over the last 14 years, I basically would not do anything else in my job, but I don't believe in that.

"I don't think that's what I should be doing and that is certainly not what I came here to do. My feeling is it's my job to harness what we bring to the table and deliver something that our crew wants and to find new people to be part of our crew. That's not to say we won't do future television deals or content partnerships or licensing agreements, but I do think we will be far more judicious in it.

"I want to make sure that as our company we're sure about what we're doing and then we also, second, we choose other platforms and companies — like Sirius is an awesome partner for us that understands that being outspoken means and having a take means somebody's not going to like your take. Letting us be the type of creators that we are and helping us to find more fans for that.

...

"I think when you look at our content in the last year, or year and a half, since I've been there, I don't think you see us saying those kind of things. No, I don't put a hand on edit and I don't want to, but I also think that you see an evolution. I think it's very convenient to say that Barstool is sexist. I also think it's very convenient to judge the past by today's standards. I also think that this is a company that intentionally is not PC. I want to harness all of those things and at our core, our guys just want to do things that are funny and that's what I'm focused on and that's what I believe in."

SEE ALSO: How the CEO of Barstool Sports beat out 74 men to land her dream job, and lost lots of friends in the process

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella says companies need to take stances on controversial issues

Steve Bannon warns that women are going to 'take charge of society'

$
0
0

Steve Bannon

  • Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon is reportedly terrified of the #MeToo movement — and thinks Oprah Winfrey poses an existential threat to President Donald Trump.
  • "Women are gonna take charge of society. And they couldn't juxtapose a better villain than Trump. He is the patriarch," he told journalist Joshua Green.


Steve Bannon is reportedly terrified of the #MeToo movement — and thinks Oprah Winfrey poses an existential threat to President Donald Trump.

In the new paperback edition of his book "Devil's Bargain," journalist Joshua Green writes that Bannon, the former Trump campaign chairman and White House chief strategist, "thought Oprah might represent an existential threat to Trump's presidency if she decided to campaign for Democrats in 2018." 

But, Green wrote, Bannon believes the most powerful backlash to Trump is bigger than Winfrey, who's been the subject of much 2020 speculation. He's most concerned by the women-led wave of liberal, anti-Trump activism, fueled by the #MeToo movement. 

"The anti-patriarchy movement is going to undo ten thousand years of recorded history," Bannon told Green. "You watch. The time has come. Women are gonna take charge of society. And they couldn't juxtapose a better villain than Trump. He is the patriarch."

Bannon made these comments after watching Winfrey deliver an impassioned speech at the 2018 Golden Globes, in which she lauded the #MeToo movement and delivered a call to arms against racial and gender-based injustice in front of an audience dressed in black to recognize victims of sexual misconduct. 

"This is a definitional moment in the culture," Bannon told Green of the Hollywood awards ceremony. "It'll never be the same going forward."

Bannon reportedly believes that upcoming elections in 2018 and 2020 will be a referendum not just on political conservatism, but on historical power imbalances. 

"The 2020 election, he was suddenly sure, wouldn't be merely the Democrats versus the Republicans, but the Patriarchy versus the Matriarchy," Green wrote. "And right now, Oprah was winning." 

SEE ALSO: Trump defends former aide embroiled in abuse scandal: 'He says he's innocent'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: North Korean defector: Kim Jong Un 'is a terrorist'


How Silicon Valley's sexist 'bro culture' affects everyone — and how to fix it

$
0
0

Emily Chang, author of 'Brotopia', discusses the sexist 'bro-culture' of Silicon Valley and what we can do to fix it.

Emily Chang: I don't wanna get into a hot tub and pitch investors my business while holding a beer. What woman wants to do that while wearing a bikini? These things are really happening.

Lauren Lyons Cole: I'm here with Emily Chang, an anchor and executive producer at Bloomberg TV who's been covering the tech industry for nearly a decade. She has a new book out called Brotopia, all about sexism in Silicon Valley. It caused quite a splash when you published an excerpt before it even came out in Vanity Fair, all about the sex parties in Silicon Valley. That is one element of the book. But it's really about so much more. What was your main goal in writing this book?

Chang: As you said, I've been covering Silicon Valley. It has always had a big gender gap. You've got women in 25% of competing jobs, they make up 7% of investors, women-led companies get 2% of funding. Off-camera, people would always talk about it. Women especially would be really frustrated. But when you try to talk to them about it on the record, nobody would say what they really have to say because it's scary to speak up about these things. As I started to do more digging and look back into how and why we got here, I realize it wasn't always this way, but that means it doesn't have to be this way, and I think that the same people who've changed the world can change this too.

Cole: There's kind of this blurring between professional and personal lives in Silicon Valley. And you're right, they have changed the world in so many ways but they've also amassed so much money. How does that play into these meetings that are happening outside of the office?

Chang: So much business in Silicon Valley gets done outside the office. We are talking about the party, the bar, the hotel lobby, the conference, maybe it's the hot tub. In a lot of situations, women are being put in uncomfortable positions where they're not able to be their best selves. I've spoken to so many women who said I don't wanna get into a hot tub and pitch investors my business while holding a beer. What woman wants to do that while wearing a bikini? A lot of the times it's their male managers that are inviting them out and they're faced with this sort of catch-22, do I go and be part of the team? Of course they're gonna talk about work. Or do I stay and be that uncool kid and not get that opportunity?

Cole: You spoke to a lot of women who had this experience but then there has been some backlash especially from big names like Elon Musk came out and said this was salacious and you should be ashamed for misleading the public. How do you respond to that kind of criticism?

Chang: I understand this is new territory to cover and to connect with this issue but no good change comes without some people feeling a little uncomfortable. I've spoken to over three dozen people who either they've been to these parties or they felt shut out by these parties, both men and women and in a lot of ways they're a lot less about sex and a lot more about power and the power dynamic is completely lopsided.

Cole: Are there companies that are getting it right? What are the companies to follow?

Chang: I talked about Slack which is the focus of the last chapter of my book. Stewart Butterfield, the CEO, has said, "This is important to me." He's put a stake in it in the ground and it's showing in the numbers. I also think that just having women in leadership position, it organically creates diversity. I talked about Eventbrite where Julia Hartz is, co-founder and now the CEO, and they're 50-50 and she said it just happened. Same with Rent the Runway. In fact, Rent the Runway is actually 70% women and minorities. Dick Costolo, the former CEO of Twitter told me that he wouldn't hire another man until he'd hire a woman. Jack Dorsey is doing something really interesting at Square. When they bring a new woman on the engineering team, they put her on a team with other women, which means that there are some teams that remain all male, but it allows that woman to bond with other women and network. And then when she has that support system, they move them around to different parts of the organization. It's an experiment. But the discrimination in Silicon Valley is systemic. And it has seeped into the culture.

This is an industry that is controlling what we see, what we read, how we shop. It's making the video games that our children are playing. And the social media that everyone is using. These companies are making products that are used by billions and billions of people and we don't think about who's actually behind the scenes but in fact it's probably the most powerful industry in the world and it's changing the way we live. Men can't be making all the decisions in Silicon Valley by themselves. The last few pages of the book, I speak with teenage girls who've learned to code and they're so excited about coming into technology. I think the industry needs to think about the message that they are sending implicitly to the younger generation. But if those girls are still here in 10 years, I think that'll be some sign of success.

 

Join the conversation about this story »

Teens are watching a surprising amount of hardcore porn — and parents need to start talking to them about it

$
0
0

Man looks at computer with headphones

  • Pornography has become more widespread violent, degrading and misogynistic than ever.
  • There are major implications for the emotional, physical and mental health of teens. 
  • Parents are concerned about the access their kids now have to porn via mobile devices.


Editor's note: This article includes references to graphic sexual content that may be inappropriate for some readers.

Today teenagers are viewing far more pornography than their parents realize. And the porn they're watching is much more "hardcore" than moms and dads could possibly imagine. 

These were the main messages of "What Teenagers are Learning From Online Porn," a recent New York Times story by Maggie Jones. It quickly became one of the most read and shared articles.

While this may be a surprise to many American parents who perhaps imagine porn as merely a naked centerfold, it wasn't to scholars like me who immerse ourselves in the world of mainstream porn. We know how widespread violent, degrading and misogynistic pornography has become, as well as the implications for the emotional, physical and mental health of young people. 

In an effort to better understand the problem from a "front-line" perspective, feminist activist Samantha Wechsler and I have been traveling the world talking to parents about the issue. The question we're asked most often is: "What can we do about it?" 

'Hardcore' porn is everywhere

Surveys and our own experiences show that parents are deeply concerned about the easy access their kids now have to porn via mobile devices.

The statistics paint a dismal picture. A recent U.K. study found that 65 percent of 15- to 16-year-olds had viewed pornography, the vast majority of whom reported seeing it by age 14. This is especially problematic given the findings of another study that found a correlation between early exposure to pornography and an expressed desire to exert power over women. 

Yet for all this concern, they know surprisingly little about what mainstream porn looks like, how much their kids are accessing and how it affects them. The Times article, however, cited a 2016 survey that suggested most parents are totally unaware of their kids' porn experiences. Jones called this the "parental naivete gap."

This matches our own experiences. In the presentations we do at high schools, we ask parents to describe what they think of when they hear the word "porn." They invariably describe a naked young woman with a coy smile, the kind of image many remember from Playboy centerfolds. 

They are shocked when they learn that the images from today's busiest free porn sites, like Pornhub, depict acts such as women being gagged with a penis or multiple men penetrating every orifice of a woman and then ejaculating on her face. When we tell parents this, the change in the atmosphere of the room is palpable. There is often a collective gasp. 

It bears repeating that these are the most visited porn sites – which get more visitors every month than Netflix, Amazon and Twitter combined. Pornhub alone received 21.2 billion visits in 2015. We are not talking about images on the fringe. 

Ana Bridges, a psychologist at the University of Arkansas, and her team found that 88 percent of scenes from 50 of the top-rented porn movies contained physical aggression against the female performers – such as spanking, slapping and gagging – while 48 percent included verbal abuse – like calling women names such as "bitch" or "slut."

Bad for your health

PornographyMore than 40 years of research from different disciplines has demonstrated that viewing pornography – regardless of age – is associated with harmful outcomes. And studies show that the younger the age of exposure, the more significant the impact in terms of shaping boys' sexual templates, behaviors and attitudes. 

2011 study of U.S. college men found that 83 percent reported seeing mainstream pornography in the past 12 months and that those who did were more likely to say they would commit rape or sexual assault (if they knew they wouldn't be caught) than men who said they had not seen porn.

Another study of young teens found that early porn exposure was correlated with perpetration of sexual harassment two years later. 

One of the most cited analyses of 22 studies concluded that pornography consumption is associated with an increased likelihood of committing acts of verbal or physical sexual aggression. And a study of college-aged women found that young women whose male partners used porn experienced lower self-esteem, diminished relationship quality and lower sexual satisfaction.

It begins with parents

Fearing for their children's well-being, parents at our presentations, whether in Los Angeles, Oslo or Warsaw, want to run home in a panic to have the "porn talk" with their kids.

But in reality, they often have no idea what to say, how to say it, or how to deal with a kid who would rather be anywhere else in the world than sitting across from their parents talking about porn. At the same time, public health research shows that parents are the first line of preventionin dealing with any major social problem that affects their kids.

So what can be done?

Most current efforts focus on teens themselves and educating them about sex and the perils of porn. Although it is crucial to have high-quality programs for teens who have already been exposed, the fact is that this is cleaning up after the fact rather than preventing the mess in the first place. 

So a team of academics, public health experts, educators, pediatricians and developmental psychologists – including us – spent two years pooling research to create a program to help parents become that vitalfirst line of defense.

That's why the nonprofit we set up – Culture Reframed – initially focused on parents of tweens, addressing a key question: How do we prevent kids from being exposed to images of sexual abuse and degradation at that critical stage when they are forming their sexual identities?

What took shape was a 12-module program that introduces parents sequentially to the developmental changes – emotional, cognitive and physical – that tweens undergo and the hypersexualized pop culture that shapes those changes and is the wallpaper of tween lives.

For example, boys learn from music videos, violent video games, mainstream media and porn that "real men" are aggressive and lack empathy, that sex equals conquest, and that to avoid being bullied, they have to wear the mask of masculinity. Girls, on the other hand, learn that they have to look "hot" to be visible, be as passive as a cartoon princess and internalize the male gaze, leading them to self-objectify at an early age.

boy kid computer ipad

Navigating the porn minefield

Helping parents grasp the degree to which hypersexualized images shape their tweens encourages them to understand, rather than judge, why their girl wants to look like one of the Kardashians, or why their boy, hazed into hypermasculinity, is at risk of losing his capacity for empathy and connection. This helps parents approach their kids with compassion rather than with frustration and anger that can undermine the parent-child relationship. 

Navigating all the minefields of living in today's toxic porn culture – from sexting and poor self esteem to porn and peer pressure – is very tricky terrain, and parents need all the help they can get. 

But ultimately, the Culture Reframed project is about so much more than providing parents with newfound confidence and skills. It's about taking power back from the porn industry, which is out to hijack the sexuality and humanity of kids in the name of profit, and giving it back to parents.

Samantha Wechsler, interim executive director of Culture Reframed, co-authored this article.

SEE ALSO: It's past time to end the debate on whether video games trigger real-world violence

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What happens when you hold in your pee for too long

Men are getting the credit for women's work through something called 'hepeating' — here's what it means

$
0
0

sheryl sandberg

  • Many women may be familiar with their own ideas being repeated by men in meetings.
  • It's called "hepeating."
  • Both men and women can adopt some strategies to stop it happening — try them out this International Women's Day.


Many women are probably familiar with their ideas and thoughts at work occasionally being met with blank faces and shrugs.

If you've not only been the victim of this, but have then had a a man step in and repeat what you've just said, there's now a word for it.

It's called "hepeating," and it describes when a man appropriates your comments or ideas and then is praised for them being his own.

The word was recently coined by a friend of astronomer Nicole Gugliucci, whose tweet explaining the term has been retweeted over 67,000 times so far.

For everyday use, Gugliucci suggests "I got hepeated in that meeting again," or, "He totally hepeated me!"

Many women responded saying that this happens to them every day, both at work and in their social lives. Others pointed out that this also highlights a point about racism, as black and minority ethnic (BME) people also have this done to them all the time.

Hepeating is yet another phrase women have come up with to describe the infuriating nature of some workplaces. We already have "mansplaining," which is when a man condescendingly explains something back to you, and "manterrupting," where he literally talks over you.

According to the Washington Post, women have recently come up with a strategy to stop this happening. It's called "amplification," which is when women's key points are listened to and repeated in meetings, giving credit to who came up with the idea. This forces others in the room — both men and women — to remember the contribution and who made it.

So don't let yourself be hepeated — team up with the other women in the room and make your voices heard.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why you hold your boss accountable, according to a Navy SEAL

People shamed Kelly Ripa for wearing a string bikini at 47, but they had a very different reaction to her husband's shirtless photo

$
0
0

kelly ripa mark consuelos

  • Kelly Ripa's husband, Mark Consuelos, recently posted photos of her in a string bikini during a tropical vacation.
  • Ripa then posted a shirtless photo of Consuelos. 
  • While Consuelos was praised for his shirtless picture, Ripa was criticized for wearing revealing clothing at 47. 
  • Ripa's shaming highlights both ageism and sexism in receptions of body image.


Kelly Ripa is no stranger to Instagram "trolls," who delight in attacking everything from her thinness to her makeup. Unfortunately, this week's installment of body-shaming comes hand-in-hand with a storied Hollywood tradition: ageism. 

Ripa's husband, Mark Consuelos, recently posted photos of his wife in a string bikini — one on his Instagram feed and the other on his story. 

"Sultry Sundays with the sexy one are my fave," he captioned one post.

Sultry Sundays with the sexy one are my fave...

A post shared by Mark Consuelos (@instasuelos) on Mar 25, 2018 at 11:38am PDT on

Many commenters agreed with Consuelos that Ripa appears to be in amazing shape— but others criticized her decision to wear revealing clothing at 47 years old.

"Kelly's gorgeous, but isn't there a cutoff age where age-appropriateness comes into play? Just because you can rock a bikini, doesn't mean you should," one person commented. "When you have teenagers whose friends can oggle pictures, then it's creepy."

"There are those who do tire of 'showing off' at your age," wrote another, adding the eyeroll emoji. 

kelly ripa mark conseulos instagram story

Many fans came to Ripa's defense and slammed the notion that bathing suits have an "age limit."

"What would a 47-year-old wear to the beach then? Pants? A skirt? These trolls are only good at one thing. Upsetting people with their offensive comments," one person wrote.

"I'm 60 years young and rock a bikini. People should mind their own business," wrote another. 

"No more body shaming. She has a body and works on it," one comment read. "There is no age limit on wearing a bikini. You should be comfortable in your own skin."

Others pointed out the sexist double standard that's implied by shaming Ripa's decision.

"By your logic ... if that's what you'd call it ... I guess that means that @instasuelos has to put a shirt on too then, since you know, teenage girls can 'oggle pictures,'" one person replied to the first comment above. "Please, you're just salty that she's fit, pretty, wealthy, living and loving life with a husband who is also fit, handsome, and clearly adores her, and her him."

Comin up for air #nofilter

A post shared by Kelly Ripa (@kellyripa) on Mar 25, 2018 at 11:53am PDT on

Indeed, Ripa posted multiple photos of her husband shirtless on the beach, which were met with overwhelmingly positive feedback. Some commenters made a point to tell Ripa how "lucky" she is, while others even referenced her husband's age — at 46, Consuelos is one year younger than his wife — and praised him for staying in shape.

"He still looks as hot as he did in his 'All My Children' days!" one fan wrote, referring to Consuelos' stint on a popular soap opera that began in 1970. 

"Is he the Real Benjamin Button? Hasn't aged at all!!" wrote another.

kelly ripa mark consuelos instagram story

It's worth noting the stark contrast between these reactions because it highlights the sexism and ageism that women experience on a daily basis— particularly if they have a career in the spotlight.

Sign up here to get INSIDER's favorite stories straight to your inbox.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: North Korean defector: Kim Jong Un 'is a terrorist'

How Nicolle Wallace went from a top GOP operative to a stranger in her own party

$
0
0

Nicolle Wallace

  • Nicolle Wallace, formerly President George W. Bush's communications director and now the host of MSNBC's "Deadline: White House," is one of the GOP's most outspoken critics of the president.
  • Wallace says the party's "volume business of misogyny," and the "cowardice" of leaders who don't stand up to it, is pushing women voters away, perhaps for good.
  • Her transformation from a top GOP political operative to a strident critic symbolizes the party's rightward shift, and the many who no longer feel welcome in its ranks.


Nicolle Wallace has always been ahead of the story.

"Politics is the ultimate reality show," the former White House communications director told TV talk-show host Wendy Williams in 2014 during a discussion of Kardashian family drama. "Anything can happen."

Wallace couldn't predict what the next two years of American politics would bring, but her instincts were spot on.

As a top adviser to Sen. John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign, Wallace clashed with Sarah Palin, McCain's running mate and then the little-known governor of Alaska who railed against the "lame-stream media," regularly fudged facts, and rejected Wallace's coaching and advice.

Ultimately, supporting Palin was a bridge too far, and Wallace didn't vote in that election.

She now says Palin, who went on to star in her own reality show, was "Trump before Trump."

"Our mistake was not understanding how ahead of her time she was," Wallace told Business Insider, pointing to Palin's irreverent, antiestablishment rhetoric and ability to tap into the rage bubbling beneath the party's surface.

Wallace left politics for good after the McCain-Palin loss. And since that jarring experience, she's become a voice for a much larger movement of Republicans, particularly women, alienated by the conservative movement's ideology and rhetoric.

'A clarion call to decency'

When the subject of Donald Trump was raised on ABC's "The View" in April 2015, Wallace, then the talk show's resident Republican, was quick to dismiss the future presidential candidate.

"Can we ignore him? He's a clown," said Wallace, who was soon pushed off the show for not expressing conservative-enough opinions.

Three years later, and now the host of her own daily news show on MSNBC, Wallace is focusing all her attention on Trump.

One of the national media's most outspoken anti-Trump Republicans, Wallace regularly delivers no-holds-barred excoriations of the administration and GOP leadership every weekday afternoon on "Deadline: White House," which debuted early last year. The topic of her discussions with journalists, lawmakers, and ex-administration officials generally revolve around the latest White House scandal, whether it's related to Russia or an adult-film star.

She's hyper-focused on what she sees as Trump's debasement of the presidency and the "cowardice" of the president's facilitators, particularly House Speaker Paul Ryan ("his spine has been removed," she says).

Fellow anti-Trump conservatives see her as something of a hero, one of the few in their party who express the appropriate level of outrage about this administration and the state of the GOP.

"There aren't any other people like her," said John Weaver, McCain's former top strategist who's highly critical of Trump and party leadership. "She comes from my business and my party, but she's a truth teller that's transparent and what she does everyday is provide a clarion call to decency."

Jennifer Lim and Meghan Milloy, the cofounders of Republican Women for Hillary, say Wallace speaks for many conservatives, particularly women, who are fearful of "bucking the system."

"The value of having Republicans speak out when Republicans are doing bad things can't really be overstated," Lim said.

Wallace sits with other senior Bush administration officials during a 2006 White House press conference.

Wallace and a party of the past

Wallace, 46, was raised in the San Francisco Bay Area by a father she once called a "confused libertarian" and a more politically moderate, but still conservative, mother (both of whom are now Trump supporters). She and her three siblings — all more liberal than she is — went to college at the University of California at Berkeley and she went on to Northwestern for a master's degree in journalism.

After a couple of years in local TV reporting, she moved into politics, taking a job with the Republican Caucus of the California State Assembly. In 1998, she worked on Republican Dan Lungren's campaign for governor, which he lost to the first Democrat to win the office in 16 years.

Lungren's 20-point defeat was a turning point for California's Republican Party, which had controlled the state for half a century.

Steve Schmidt, a top GOP political consultant who first met Wallace during the 1998 campaign, says the party "obliterated itself" with Gov. Pete Wilson's racialized and deeply anti-immigrant 1994 reelection campaign. And even though Wilson was successful in winning his own elections, he undermined the party's long-term appeal.

"The TV ads were Mexicans running across the border with an ominous voice of God saying in the ad, 'They're coming, they're coming, they keep coming,'' Schmidt recalled. "People went nuts — it destroyed the Republican Party."

The next year, 25-year-old Wallace left California for Florida, where she took a job as Gov. Jeb Bush's press secretary. From there, she followed the Bush family into national politics and, soon enough, the White House.

Schmidt, who served as McCain's 2008 campaign manager and recruited Palin to the ticket, says the national Republican Party under Trump is following in the footsteps of the California GOP, which hasn't elected a member to statewide office in over a decade.

He says the national party, whose brand he calls "shattered, broken, done," has been infected by a "'Star Wars' cantina bar scene of creatures from another planet" and can't continue to appeal to a majority of American voters.

"The Republican Party that [Wallace] grew up in in California was a party that accommodated moderates and centrists and women and had room for dissent and debate," Schmidt said. "Twenty years ago it wasn't a strange thing to be a woman Republican from California or to be in your 20s and be a Republican. It made perfect sense."

But things have changed and Wallace represents the kind of Republican woman who's no longer welcome in her own party. "She's an archetype of her time," Schmidt said of Wallace, "of a Republicanism that's gone — tragically, by the way, but gone."

Trump with Kellyanne Conway and Hope Hicks at a campaign event

'Why don't they walk out en masse?'

Wallace — along with pollsters and strategists on both sides of the aisle — has long argued that the GOP is either too conservative or too sexist to appeal to a large chunk of female voters. She blamed Republican men for waging a "hot gender war" against the women in their party in the lead-up to Trump's election.

"Are you proud that our path to victory is to just turn out more white guys?" she asked Republican Sens. John Barrasso and Tom Cotton during an MSNBC panel at the 2016 Republican National Convention. (The senators responded with nervous laughter.)

Wallace argues the GOP's so-called war on women — a Democratic characterization of the party's agenda on women's reproductive rights — is "almost innocuous" when compared with its "volume business of misogyny," and toleration of alleged sexual assault and child molestation.

"If you're offended by misogyny then I don't think you're attracted to the Republican Party in the time of Trump," she said.

And little gets Wallace more riled up than when women are attacked — or when they fail to stand up for each other.

After the president lavished praise on a former top aide who resigned amid allegations that he abused his two ex-wives, Wallace lamented the lack of protest among Trump's female staffers.

"Where are the women?" she asked. "Why don't they walk out en masse?"

It's personal for Wallace, who counts many at the highest levels of the party among her oldest friends.

She says she "really can't figure out" the women she knows who work in the White House — people like Mercedes Schlapp, a former Bush-administration colleague who is now Trump's director of strategic communications and reportedly a contender for the top communications job recently exited by Hope Hicks.

But, Wallace says, she doesn't lay special blame on women for what she sees as the complicity of the entire party.

"You make the problem worse by laying it at the feet of other women," she said. "What sets the party back isn't just the president's posture toward women — it's every powerful man in the party looking away and doing nothing. I've just never seen a display of cowardice like their silence."

The extinction of moderate Republican women

Wallace insists her political ideology hasn't changed during her decades in politics and that many women who have spent their careers in GOP politics also feel the party has moved away from them.

"There's broad recognition among women who worked in the Republican Party when it was lead by Mitt Romney or George Bush or George H. W. Bush, or Ronald Reagan, that the party is largely unrecognizable," Wallace said.

And she laments that moderate female Republican lawmakers, like Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, are "as rare as a Tyrannosaurus Rex."

"This species of a powerful, moderate Republican woman is near extinct," she said. Are moderate Republican women welcome in the party today? "No, quite simply," said Wallace.

Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski sit beside President Donald Trump.

The disappearance of these women in conservative politics is reflected among voters. Trump lost women by 12 points and won men by 12 points. The 24-point gender gap was the largest ever in the 50-year history of exit polling.

The increased gap was largely caused by a surge in GOP support among white men, rather than a large drop among women. (The majority — 53% — of white women, and 62% of white women without a college degree, voted for the GOP ticket.)

But a dramatic shift is occurring among millennial women, 70% of whom now affiliate with or lean toward the Democratic Party — up from 56% four years ago, according to recent Pew Research Center polling.

Supporters of the president say that Wallace's views are held by a minority of Republican women, many of whom are geographically and culturally more similar to Democratic voters than to their fellow Republicans.

"Do I think she accurately represents how moderate Republicans who live in urban areas with college degrees feel? Sure," Scott Jennings, a top Republican strategist who worked with Wallace in the Bush White House, said of Wallace. "She presents a point of view that is representative of what the viewers of MSNBC would want to hear out of a disaffected Republican."

Jennings argued that while these moderate women are "not an insignificant" group, they may have been swing voters to begin with. But polling shows conservative women are beginning to lose faith in the president.

Support for Trump among white evangelical women has dropped 13 percentage points over the last year — from 73% to 60%, according to data gathered by Pew and published in The Washington Post.

Katie Packer Beeson, the cofounder of a consulting company that focuses on female outreach for Republican candidates, says it's a mistake to ignore the conservative women increasingly alienated by the president.

A self-described "hard-core conservative" and a veteran of the Bush administration and Romney campaign, Beeson says she's no longer welcome in the conservative mainstream because she doesn't support the president.

"Most of us are very hard-core conservative in our political thinking, but we've just been pushed out to the fringe of the Republican Party because we haven't been willing to bend a knee," Beeson said of her fellow anti-Trump Republicans. "It's too much extremism, it's too much hypocrisy, it's too much disrespect and disregard for women. We just cannot abide it."

SEE ALSO: Conway and other women reveal what it's like to work in Trump's White House

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: North Korean defector: Kim Jong Un 'is a terrorist'

Why the #MeToo movement skipped Russia

$
0
0

putin

  • Russia decriminalized domestic violence early last year, reducing the penalty for abuse to fines, community service or 10 to 15 days in jail.
  • Women who attempted to speak out in support of the #MeToo movement were met with violence and public ridicule.
  • Figures released by Human Rights suggest that 12,000 Russian women die as a result of abuse each year, though the number may be higher.
  • Putin has made a number of degrading statements towards women in the past, most recently a joke about rape at a public event in February.


When Russia decriminalized domestic violence in February 2017, civil servants tasked with protecting women in the country's far east were dismayed by the new vulnerability of their wards. Yet few officials opposed the measure. President Vladimir Putin signed off on the bill after the lower house of the Russian parliament, the Duma, overwhelmingly approved it by a vote of 380 to 3. The new law recategorized the crime of violence against family members: Abuse that does not result in broken bones, and does not occur more than once a year, is no longer punishable by long prison sentences. The worst sanctions that abusers now face are fines of up to $530, 10- to 15-day stints in jail, or community service work. That's if the courts side with the victim. They rarely do.

The change made it "that much harder for women" who had suffered abuse, says Natalia Pankova, the director of a state-run domestic violence organization called Sail of Hope. Pankova, based in the city of Vladivostok, oversees 10 crisis centers for women and children across the surrounding region, Primorye, a heavily forested area hugging the Sea of Japan.

Pankova and her colleagues have painstakingly searched for a silver lining in the legislation. "At least the issue of domestic violence is being discussed at the government level," she says during an interview at her office, decorated with model ships and oil paintings of the open sea.

But family lawyers and women's rights workers believe the legislation represents a turning point in the freedoms of Russian women, a dark signal from the very top of government that their lives are losing value. At least 12,000 women in Russia die at the hands of their abusers each year, according to Human Rights Watch. The real number is likely higher.

Over the past half-year, the #MeToo movement has swept across Europe, the Americas, and parts of Asia and Africa. But many Russian women's rights activists fear the global reckoning has simply passed them by.

Feminism here has a complicated history laden with paradoxes. Until recently, the average Russian woman — even those who believed in gender equality — treated the word itself with scorn. Many saw it as an aggressive Western attack on femininity and a Russian belief system in which women are encouraged, and expected, to see motherhood as their first priority. It also seemed redundant, as women in Russia had long since gained many of the rights their Western counterparts were still clamoring to win.

The right to vote, for example, was granted to all Russian men and women in 1917 in the run-up to the October Revolution. After taking power, the Bolsheviks granted women numerous additional freedoms, some of them unheard of anywhere else, such as the right to abortion. The Soviet Constitution of 1936 declared men and women to be equal and also introduced paid maternity leave and free child care in the workplace.

But these historic victories should not obscure an ugly modern truth about present-day Russia. Here, "women have a single role: that of a subservient and silent subordinate who knows her place," wrote Yevgenia Albats, the editor of the liberalNew Timesmagazine, in January.

Of course, Putin, backed by the resurgent Russian Orthodox Church, has made his country more conservative in numerous ways. Under this new patriarchal order, gender stereotypes are thriving, according to Oksana Pushkina, a lawmaker with the ruling United Russia party. Describing current attitudes, Pushkina, who heads the Russian parliament's committee on family, women, and children, says, "Men must be masculine and strong, and women should be feminine mothers." Such social mores, she says, represent a "massive impediment in the development of women's rights … and completely [hold] back the strength and position of Russian women in society."

When the time came to vote on the changes to domestic violence legislation, the thought of looking into her fellow deputies' eyes made Pushkina physically ill. She stayed at home. "I crumpled!" she says. She is now working with like-minded politicians and activists to try to overturn the law by passing a brand-new measure aimed specifically at preventing domestic violence.

Theirs could be an uphill battle, for Putin's bare-chested machismo, while a source of humor abroad, has been accompanied by a sharp rise in misogyny at home. The Russian leader joked about rape as recently as February, has boasted that his country's prostitutes are the best in the world, and has put down women for menstruating.

Perhaps it is little wonder, then, that when the Harvey Weinstein scandal broke in October 2017, the general Russian attitude, on the part of both men and women, was overwhelmingly one of bemusement and victim shaming. A group of women even stripped naked near the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. One hoisted a placard that read, "Harvey Weinstein Welcome to Russia."

Those who have attempted to tell their own #MeToo stories have been met with ridicule or threats of violence. In January 2017, Diana S., a 17-year-old, appeared on a popular Russian talk show and described her rape by a 21-year-old man. Online commentators, bloggers, and the state-run media promptly blamed her for the attack. Russia's Burger King franchise even created a parody, turning an image of Diana explaining how much alcohol she consumed on the night of her rape into an advertisement showing how long a meal discount would last. (Burger King later withdrew the ad but did not apologize.) Then, in October, a 12-year-old named Anastasia appeared on a nationally televised dating show in support of her single father. She told the audience that the two often discuss issues such as feminism. She later received death threats from viewers.

Despite the intimidation, some Russian women — particularly millennials in Moscow and St. Petersburg — are continuing to fight back. After the grisly murder of 19-year-old Tatiana Strakhova at the hands of her ex-boyfriend in January, hundreds of Russian women posed on social media wearing only their underwear alongside the hashtag #ThisIsNoReasonToKill.

Still, attempts to create a Russian form of #MeToo are embryonic, at best. In February, after female reporters complained that lawmaker Leonid Slutsky had harassed them in parliament, not only were there no demands that he step down, but a deputy speaker of the Duma, Igor Lebedev, called for these journalists to be barred from covering the legislature. Slutsky and other male lawmakers then took to Facebook, where they openly boasted about how many female reporters they could "take."

SEE ALSO: No one knows Putin's exact net worth, but many speculate he's the wealthiest person on the planet — his $1 billion palace and $500 million yacht explain why

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's why the US Men's team sucks at soccer

Sexism makes women physically ill, a new study found

$
0
0
The Conversation

sexism womens march sexual harrassment health

  • An estimated 1 in 3 women and 1 in 6 men in the US experience sexual violence in their lifetime. 
  • Researchers examined patterns of 3,724 men and women in a recent study to determine how gender discrimination and sexual harrassment affect physical and mental health.
  • The study found that women who perceived sexual harassment also reported worse physical health, and the overall results suggest that sexism is responsible for about 9 to 10% of a gender gap in self-reported health.

Recent social movements such as the Women's March, #MeToo, #TimesUp, #BalanceTonPorc (#OutYourPig), and #SayHerName draw attention to the broad spectrum gender-related violence that is pervasive in the United States and around the world.

Social science research takes a different form than protests, but paints a similar picture. A recent report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 1 in 3 women and 1 in 6 men in the US experience contact sexual violence in their lifetime. Contact sexual violence is defined as being made to have sexual intercourse with someone else, being sexually coerced, or having unwanted sexual contact.

Other types of sexism, including gender discrimination and sexual harassment, are even more frequent. A 2016 report from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission estimates that between 25% to 85% of women in the US experience workplace sexual harassment in their lifetimes.

We, a sociologist and a social epidemiologist, teamed up to find out the effects sexism has on people's health.

The big question: Does sexism hurt health?

Our study, recently published in the Journal of Health and Social Behavior, examined patterns of workplace discrimination and harassment in the US and the consequences for physical and mental health. We sought, first, to determine how pervasive these types of mistreatment were for women, as well as for men.

Our second goal was to determine whether sexism, along with other forms of discrimination and harassment, contributed to health disparities between women and men.

Numerous studies show that women tend to report worse health compared to men, and we wanted to see if workplace discrimination and harassment might be contributing to this disparity.

We used statistical methods to analyze data from the US General Social Survey, a national survey of English- and Spanish-speaking adults. The 2006, 2010 and 2014 surveys each contain a special section focusing on the quality of working life in the past year, including questions about discrimination in respondents' current job, as well as respondents' experiences with workplace sexual harassment and other forms of harassment.

A total of 3,724 out of 5,579 economically active respondents across the three survey years answered all of the questions we analyzed, and this group forms the basis of our research. We used weighting procedures (i.e., numerical adjustments applied to groups of respondents which were either under or overrepresented in the sample, relative to their actual size in the population) in all our analyses, so that the GSS data would be reflective of the broader US population.

As with other studies, our results showed that women report significantly worse mental and physical health compared to men. When asked, "Now thinking about your mental health, which includes stress, depression, and problems with emotions, for how many days during the past 30 days was your mental health not good?" women reported an average of 3.6 days of poor mental health in the past 30 days. Men, in comparison, reported significantly less: an average of 2.8 days. When asked about their days of poor physical health in the past 30 days, women reported an average of 2.7 days, with men reporting an average of 2.2 days.

Gender discrimination four times more often

Of the women surveyed, 8.4% reported experiencing gender discrimination in their current job, and 4.1% indicated they had experienced sexual harassment at work within the past 12 months. Some men reported workplace gender discrimination and sexual harassment too, but the percentage was significantly lower (2% and 1.3% respectively).

In addition to gender discrimination and sexual harassment, we also examined other forms of mistreatment in the workplace. We found that nearly a quarter of women, or 23%, indicated that they had either experienced some form of discrimination, based on race, age, or gender, or a combination, in their current job or they had experienced some type of harassment in the past year. The rate of perceived workplace mistreatment among men was significantly lower at 16.5%.

How harassment hurts

One of the main goals of our study was to examine the relationship between workplace sexual harassment, gender discrimination and health outcomes. We used a range of sophisticated statistical techniques to assess these relationships, including multivariate regression models which estimated the effect of various forms of mistreatment on health outcomes, while accounting for other potential causes for ill health (age, low socioeconomic background, etc.).

We found that, among women, perceptions of gender discrimination are significantly associated with worse self-reported mental health. Women who perceived sexual harassment also reported worse physical health. We did not find a significant association between gender discrimination and sexual harassment with health outcomes among men, but this may be a result of the small number of men reporting these forms of mistreatment.

We also examined the combined effects of reporting multiple forms of discrimination and harassment. Here we found that respondents who perceived multiple forms of mistreatment reported significantly worse mental health than those who perceived no mistreatment, or just one form of mistreatment. Among women, the combination of age and gender discrimination was particularly detrimental for mental health. Women who reported experiencing both age and gender discrimination had an average of 9 days of poor mental health in the past 30 days.

Big reason for health gender gap

We wanted to know whether workplace mistreatment contributed to the gender gap in self-reported health. In other words, our statistical models were used to test whether sexism was a driver of the observed gender disparities in self-reported health.

Our results suggest that gender discrimination is responsible for around 9 to 10% of the gender gap in self-reported health. In other words, if we were to reduce the frequency of gender discrimination, we'd likely see a significant reduction in gender-based health inequality.

Overall, our results suggest that sexism takes a toll on women's health and well-being. The high frequency with which women experience sexism — at work and elsewhere — underscores the importance of viewing it not only as a social justice issue, but also a public health issue.

SEE ALSO: How Silicon Valley's sexist 'bro culture' affects everyone — and how to fix it

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I tried the newest BlackBerry phone for a week


A female pilot called out sexist male passengers on her flight — and the internet has her back

$
0
0

stealth movie

  • A pilot named Charlotte has gone viral for calling out her sexist passengers.
  • She says two men recently told her: "Are you the pilot? If I'd known that, I wouldn't have got on," and "I won't make any jokes about female drivers then."
  • Charlotte's Twitter thread encouraged other people to share their experiences with sexism.
  • Gender Gap Grader found that women make up only about 5.44% of commercial airline pilots globally

It is 2018, so, you'd assume people would be accustomed to the fact that women have jobs, some of which are in fields traditionally dominated by men, like aviation.

But apparently, this is not the case. On Saturday, a pilot named Charlotte wrote on Twitter that she'd had a "lovely day" flying with her crew but that something happened on the flight that marred her experience.

Charlotte said two men on the flight made two comments to her: "Are you the pilot? If I'd known that, I wouldn't have got on," and "I won't make any jokes about female drivers then."

She said she was "baffled" as to why the men felt the comments were necessary.

But Charlotte had a perfect rebuttal: "Fact is, I can fly an £80m jet, you can't." (According to Boeing, the commercial airplane she flies for her job can cost over $400 million.)

Despite the comeback, Charlotte was still exasperated by the encounter.

"It is this attitude that puts women off and another barrier stopping them from going into male dominated careers," she wrote. "It shouldn't even be a thing!!! I am a pilot he is a pilot. See, there is no difference."

As Charlotte's tweet gained traction, other people — including other pilots — reached out to share their experiences with sexism.

The sexism Charlotte experienced onboard may be emblematic of a gender disparity in aviation. Gender Gap Grader found that women make up only about 5.44% of commercial airline pilots globally.

But ultimately, Charlotte said she wasn't fazed by the comments.

"My career is my dream, always has been," she told INSIDER. "I always wanted to be able to inspire more women [to be pilots], especially the younger generations, so that we can change people's perceptions on what is still a man's world. I take this as part of my job."

There's clearly a long way to go toward equality among pilots. But perhaps Charlotte's Twitter thread will inspire a few more women to enter the field — or, you know, air.

Sign up here to get INSIDER's favorite stories straight to your inbox.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Super-Earths are real and they could be an even better place for life than Earth

Megyn Kelly called out Trump's comments about Samantha Bee as the 'height of hypocrisy'

$
0
0

megyndonald 

  • Megyn Kelly said there was a double standard for Republican women and Democratic women on Megyn Kelly Today Friday morning.
  • She also conceded that the White House feigning horror at Samantha Bee’s remarks about Ivanka Trump is the "height of hypocrisy"
  • Kelly cited the 2015 presidential debate in which she asked Donald Trump about his derogatory comments about women as evidence that the White House set a precedence for sexism.

Megyn Kelly welcomed NBC’s Kate Snow, PBS’ Amy Holmes, and MSNBC’s Zerlina Maxwell to her namesake talk show Friday morning to discuss Samantha Bee’s calling First Daughter Ivanka Trump a "feckless c---," and all the fallout thereafter.

"There’s definitely a double standard when the woman under attack is a Republican versus a Democrat, and that shouldn’t be," Kelly said, echoing her Thursday morning tweet in which she compared Bee’s now-infamous remark about Trump to Roseanne Barr’s condemnation in the wake of her racist tweets about former Obama adviser Valerie Jarett.

Though Kelly caught a lot of flack from the left for equating Bee’s use of the c-word with Barr’s racism, there is at least one matter on which the talk show host is decidedly liberal-minded: That Donald Trump’s White House clutching their pearls in faux horror at Sam Bee’s insult is duplicity at its most transparent.

"It’s the height of hypocrisy for the Trump White House to be saying there’s a double standard...like, they’re upset about a sexist, crude remark? The Trump White House?!" Kelly says with incredulity as she gapes at her audience. "Are they kidding me?"

 

 

 

Zerlina Maxwell agreed, remembering how "Ted Nugent called Hillary Clinton the same c-word" and was rewarded by being invited to the White House to take a photo with the president. "And so I don’t think they have any legs to stand on," the MSNBC analyst said.

Kelly hammered her argument home as she explained how Trump effectively created a double standard for sexism in the nation. "I looked Donald Trump in the eye and listed just a small sampling of his sexist remarks about women at that presidential debate," said Kelly, citing the questions she’d posed to Trump in a 2015 Republican debate  about his having called women "fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals."

(Trump became so flustered by Kelly’s line of questioning he afterwards famously remarked to CNN's Don Lemon that Kelly had "blood coming out of her whatever.")

"His response to me was, ‘What I say is what I say, and we’ve gotten too PC in this country,’" the conservative host told the roundtable Friday morning. "And that resonated with many people."

"So that’s going to be your position," Kelly concluded of Donald Trump’s White House. "That’s the door you opened, willingly walked through, that’s the example you set."


Sign up here to get INSIDER's favorite stories straight to your inbox.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I tried the newest BlackBerry phone for a week

The CEO of Qatar Airways said that a woman couldn't do his job because it is 'very challenging'

$
0
0

qatar airways ceo akbar al baker

  • Qatar Airways CEO Akbar al Baker said his company must be led by a man because it is a "very challenging job."
  • It elicited boos and groans from a room of journalists at a transportation conference.
  • He attempted to row back the comments later in the day, saying he would actually welcome a woman as his successor.


The CEO of Qatar Airways was booed at a press conference for saying that a woman couldn't do his job "because it is a very challenging position."

While telling journalists on Tuesday that women were not being underrepresented at the airline, Akbar al Baker added: "Of course it has to be led by a man, because it is a very challenging position."

His comments, made at an International Air Transport Association (IATA) annual meeting in Sydney, elicited boos and groans of disapproval from many journalists in the room, Bloomberg reported.

Al Baker attempted to row back his comments later that day, claiming that he was "only referring to one individual" and that he would welcome a woman to be his successor.

He told Bloomberg: "I was only referring to one individual. I was not referring to the staff in general." It is not clear which individual he was referring to. Qatar Airways has not responded to Business Insider's request for comment.

Al Baker added that that one-third of Qatar Airways staff are female, and that there was "no gender inequality in Qatar Airways or in my country."

"It will be my pleasure to have a female CEO candidate I could develop to become CEO after me," he said.

The exchange comes around the 5:35 mark in the video below.

The airline industry is particularly difficult for women, as female pilots remain vastly outnumbered by their male counterparts, and female crew on many airlines face discriminatory employment practices 

Many female pilots in the US have pointed out the lack of paid maternity leave or alternative ground assignments for new mothers as obstacles. Until August 2015, female crew at Qatar Airways were fired if they became pregnant or got married.

Being a flight attendant in South Korea is also particularly competitive, as applicants are pressured by unspoken beauty standards that have led many to undertake plastic surgery including forehead moulding, nose bridge raising, and changing the shape of their face.

The lack of female representation even goes up to the CEO level: the IATA, of which al Baker became chairman this week, only has one woman on its board of 26 people — Christine Ourmières-Widener, CEO of Britain's Flybe carrier.

SEE ALSO: The incredible life of Kate McWilliams, the easyJet pilot who became the world's youngest female captain at the age of 26

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: An NYC car club houses more 40 classic cars that members can take for a ride

Kellyanne Conway and Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the women who speak for Trump, may help shelter him from charges of sexism

$
0
0

kellyanne conway white house trump administration sexist 2

  • Kellyanne Conway began her political career in the Trump administration as his campaign manager for the 2016 president al election.
  • As Counselor to the President, Conway has lasted longer than many of President Trump's top advisors in the White House.
  • She praises the president for giving her and other women opportunities to succeed in his campaign, administration, and in real estate.
  • Yet Trump's past with women and sexism allegations overshadow Conway's accomplishments as the first woman to run a successful American presidential campaign.

For Kellyanne Conway, the political bungee jump of a lifetime started almost two years ago — first as a top official for Candidate Trump, then as counselor to President Trump. She's an insider's insider on Team Trump, lasting longer than many of the president's top advisers.

But don't call her a "survivor" — despite the fact that she has witnessed the departure of many senior Trump White House colleagues, from the first chief of staff and spokesman, to two national security advisers, to several communications directors. 

"I look at it as thriving more than surviving," Ms. Conway told reporters Wednesday at a breakfast hosted by The Christian Science Monitor.

Conway speaks reverentially of her daily arrival at the White House, where she says "a daily prayer and begin[s] the day recognizing that I work for a man and a vice president … who are making decisions that impact people's lives."

She also praises the president for giving her and other women opportunities to succeed — not just in his campaign and administration, but also in his real estate career. Even Trump critics acknowledge that he did give women leadership opportunities in his business operations decades ago when such a practice was less common. For Conway in 2016, it was a matter of proving herself first as a campaign strategist before she was elevated to manager, after the firing of Paul Manafort.

"Look, I'm 51 years old. I was a pollster and a political consultant for years and years, and everyone knew who I was…. I worked on campaigns, I worked for corporate America, I had a great life, successful business," Conway says. "However, it is Donald J. Trump that elevated me to campaign manager and counselor to the president. And women should look at that example."

Conway will go down in history as the first woman to run a successful American presidential campaign — a point that would have gained more notice were she not a conservative Republican, says Conway friend and GOP campaign lawyer Cleta Mitchell.

"If she were a liberal Democrat, she'd be the toast of the country," says Ms. Mitchell. "She'd be on the cover of every women's magazine.… I mean, Donna Brazile ran Al Gore's losing campaign, and they thought she was a genius."

Left unstated is Trump's "women troubles" — the 16 women who have accused him of sexual harassment and unwanted touching, and the infamous "Access Hollywood" tape that surfaced a month before the election, in which Trump brags in crude terms about grabbing women.

It's also not difficult to find comments by Conway in the not-too-distant past disparaging Trump, from her days early in the 2016 presidential campaign working for a super political action committee that backed Sen. Marco Rubio (R) of Florida. In January 2016, she referred to Trump as one who "seems to be offending his way to the nomination and calling it honesty."

kellyanne conway sarah sanders white house trump administration sexist

But in politics, such verbal shape-shifting is commonplace, and no one blinked when Conway joined the Trump train and began singing his praises. Conway and Trump, in fact, go way back. They met when she and her husband lived in Trump Tower, and she joined the condo board.

Today, the women who speak for Trump — including Conway and Press Secretary Sarah Sanders — may help insulate him from charges of sexism. Until recently, Trump's communications operation was thoroughly dominated by women, also including the now-departed communications director Hope Hicks and Omarosa Manigault-Newman, director of communications for the Office of Public Liaison; director of strategic communications Mercedes Schlapp; director of media affairs Helen Ferré; and various press-shop deputies and assistants.

Technically, Conway isn't a member of his communications team. She holds the rank of "counselor," meaning she can play a variety of roles, as the president's needs require.

"It allows her to associate herself with more than just the word ‘communications,' " says Martha Joynt Kumar, a veteran expert on presidential communications with a desk in the White House press room. "She can be involved in figuring out how things are going in the political world with the constituencies. She knows the campaign, she knows what he stood for — and he needs people around who remind him of that."

Ms. Kumar calls Kellyanne a "floater," someone who can have a toe in multiple issues and facets of White House operations, similar to the role George Stephanopoulos played for President Bill Clinton.

"People like having flexibility," says Kumar. "You can get involved in policy in different ways. [Mr. Stephanopoulos] was communications director; it was difficult for him to be involved in policy and then also do briefings. But if you have the comms job, you have to be out front more. It makes you more of a target."

And if West Wing real estate is a signal of power, Conway certainly can claim primacy. She occupies the same third-floor garret that once belonged to Valerie Jarrett under President Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton when her husband was president.

kellyanne conway white house trump administration sexist

At the breakfast, Conway makes clear she has no interest in becoming communications director, a job that some say is effectively filled by Trump himself — a man who is at heart a salesman, and whose use of Twitter has only grown. During the breakfast, the host's phone lit up multiple times with Trump tweets; at one point, Conway reached over to take a look and check out what the boss was saying. (He was tweeting about "fake news.")

Conway insisted, in fact, that she can't become the president's top person handling communications strategy. "I do feel like we're impacting lives, and I travel often on behalf of the president, one of many reasons I can't be a communications director, per se," she says.

As the mother of four children, some still in elementary school, Conway makes no bones about the challenge of juggling work and family. On a recent day in the press room, chatting with reporters, she complained good-naturedly about the White House's ban on the use of personal cellphones by staff. But she is always quick to commend Trump for his treatment of the moms who work for him.

"He's also a great boss to me, as a woman, as a working mother," Conway said at the breakfast. "We have fun in the workplace, even though the issues are very serious and very grave."

Among Conway, Sanders (three children), and Ms. Schlapp (five children), the White House could practically open its own day-care center.

Conway's praise of the president's family-friendliness may seem incongruous with the administration's new practice of separating immigrant parents and children at the Southern border. The issue of family separation did not come up at the Monitor Breakfast, though the overarching issue of the GOP and immigration policy did.

"We either are a sovereign nation that has borders with laws on the books that are enforced, or we're not, and people have to decide what the ‘or not' looks like and feels like," Conway said.

For Conway, the juggle of work and family is only part of the sensibility that informs her advice to Trump. Her working-class upbringing in Atco, N.J., is also essential to her persona and to the window into American life that she offers Trump.

"I'm a good version of the American Dream, raised by a single mom who didn't go to college and found herself with no alimony or child support," she notes at the breakfast. "At the age of 25, 26, divorced, and very little skill set. I think it's a very common human experience in this country."

SEE ALSO: Kellyanne Conway's husband reportedly gives anti-Trump writers suggestions on how to improve their arguments

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I tried the newest BlackBerry phone for a week

9 things people think are fine to say at work — but are actually racist, sexist, or offensive

$
0
0

upset coworker

  • What is a microaggression? They are unconscious expressions of racism or sexism.
  • That unconscious bias is everywhere — especially in the workplace.
  • To avoid a toxic workplace culture, it's important to know which phrases and actions can make employees from different backgrounds or identities feel uncomfortable and targeted.

Microaggressions are unconscious expressions of racism or sexism. They come out in seemingly innocuous comments by people who might be well-intentioned. 

From telling a new female worker that she "looks like a student" to asking a black colleague about her natural hair, microaggressions often exist in the workplace, too. And they can make a workplace feel unsafe and toxic

"Because microaggressions are often communicated through language, it is very important to pay attention to how we talk, especially in the workplace and other social institutions like classrooms, courtrooms, and so on," Christine Mallinson, professor of language, literacy, and culture at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, told Business Insider.

Because microaggressions are so subtle, it's hard to know if you're committing one or if you're on the receiving end.

"One thing is that they are in a sense ambiguous, so that the recipient is apt to feel vaguely insulted, but since the words look and sound complimentary, on the surface (they're most often positive), she can't rightly feel insulted and doesn't know how to respond," Robin Lakoff, Professor Emerita of Linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, told Business Insider.

Here are some of the most common microaggressions:

SEE ALSO: Here's the presentation Google gives employees on how to spot unconscious bias at work

DON'T MISS: There's a war on the way women talk — and it needs to end

'You're so articulate'

"When a white colleague tells a colleague of color 'You're so articulate' or 'You speak so well,' the remark suggests that they assumed the person in question would be less articulate — and are surprised to find out they aren't," Mallinson told Business Insider.

Commenting on a black person's language or speaking habits has a complicated history, and this is a problem that African-Americans especially encounter in the workplace or school.

"We (a white-dominant society) expect black folks to be less competent," wrote A. Gordon in The Root. "And, speaking as a white person, when we register surprise at a black individual's articulateness, we also send the not-so-subtle message that that person is part of a group that we don't expect to see sitting at the table, taking on a leadership role."

What to say instead: Nothing. You can commend people on their specific ideas or insights, but commenting on how people speak is unnecessary.



'Oh, sorry, wrong person'

If you're an underrepresented minority, and there's one other person of your identity in the room, there's a chance that the majority group will confuse your names. 

"When I started grad school, the intro class was taught by two white women and I was one of two Mexican-Americans in the cohort,"one Buzzfeed reader shared. "They constantly called me Maria, the other girl's name. My name is Alejandra and we look nothing alike."

What to say instead: Learn your coworkers' names. It's a pretty basic concept. 



'My boss is crazy'

Calling your female boss "crazy" or "hysterical" has sexist undertones, because these words have a long, problematic history. 

"In the past, especially in 19th century Europe, women who had anxiety or who were seen as troublemakers were often diagnosed as being 'hysterical,'" Mallinson told Business Insider.
"The word 'hysterical'
comes from the Greek word hystera, meaning uterus, signifying that the so-called disease was specific to women."

So, when you call a woman "crazy," it suggests that her concerns or actions are illogical, rather than the result of critical thinking. 

What to say instead: Try to understand your colleague's viewpoint rather than ascribing her actions as illogical. If you still don't agree, you could say: "I don't understand her perspective on this"— then ask her for her insights. 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider
Viewing all 410 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>