Last week, the Pentagon announced a change in policy that eased the ban on women serving in combat. This is a heartening step towards ending gender discrimination in the military and giving women who bravely serve our country the credit they have earned.
The announcement, though, was problematic for Fox News contributor Liz Trotta. She explained that women's "wanting to be warriors and victims at the same time" is an issue, citing that sexual assaults in the military have increased by 64 percent since 2006.
Last week, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control reported the results of its extensive survey on intimate partner and sexual violence in the United States. The findings were staggering. In the past year alone, 1.3 million women were raped. In their lifetime, approximately 1 in 5 women have been raped and 1 in 6 women have been stalked. 1 in 4 women have been the victim of severe physical violence by an intimate partner.
It is Domestic Violence Awareness Month, a time when many of us ask: what can we do about the injustice of intimate partner abuse? More than 10 years ago, Jessica Lenahan faced just that question when the police failed to respond to her pleas for help, resulting in the deaths of her three children. Following that tragedy, she took the issue of police response to domestic violence to the United States Supreme Court, which ruled that she had no constitutional right to enforcement of her restraining order, and then to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).
This month marks the 20th anniversary of Anita Hill's testimony at Clarence Thomas' Supreme Court confirmation hearings. Twenty years ago, in the face of extreme pressure, Professor Hill recounted the ways that Thomas, who had been her boss at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, sexually harassed her at work by pressuring her for dates, detailing pornographic films, and bragging about his sexual prowess. In spite of witness testimony supporting Hill's assertions, Senator Arlen Specter accused her of "flat-out perjury." Clarence Thomas was confirmed to the Supreme Court by a vote of 52-48.
Today, Wal-Mart v. Dukes was argued in front of the Supreme Court. At issue is whether this sex discrimination case against Wal-Mart should be allowed to proceed as a class action. The ACLU submitted a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that class actions are appropriate when employees allege that a company's policy allowing managers to subjectively decide who receives promotions and pay increases has led to gender disparities, even in a company as large as Wal-Mart. Today we're featuring quotes from women who have commented on our posts about the case, with striking examples of sex discrimination they have experienced on the job.
Tomorrow, Wal-Mart v. Dukes will be argued in front of the Supreme Court. At issue is whether this sex discrimination case against Wal-Mart should be allowed to proceed as a class action. The ACLU submitted a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that class actions are appropriate when employees allege that a company’s policy allowing managers to subjectively decide who receives promotions and pay increases has led to gender disparities, even in a company as large as Wal-Mart. Today we’re featuring quotes from women who have commented on our posts about the case, with striking examples of sex discrimination they have experienced on the job.
On March 29, Wal-Mart v. Dukes will be argued in front of the Supreme Court. At issue is whether this sex discrimination case against Wal-Mart should be allowed to proceed as a class action. The ACLU submitted a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that class actions are appropriate when employees allege that a company’s policy allowing managers to subjectively decide who receives promotions and pay increases has led to gender disparities, even in a company as large as Wal-Mart. Today we’re featuring quotes from women who have commented on our posts about the case, with striking examples of sex discrimination they have experienced on the job.
Samantha*, a single mother from Seattle, is actively searching for housing for herself and her young daughter. She was once involved in crime connected to her drug addiction, but served her time in prison and successfully completed rehab. All she needs to be a productive citizen supporting her child is a decent place to live.
However, she faces one major hurdle: landlords keep rejecting her applications for tenancy because of her criminal record. All her hard work to put her life back on the right track has been for naught; landlords take one look at her record and reject her. She is not allowed a chance to show she can be a good tenant. She and her daughter will join the ranks of the homeless when her temporary housing with a re-entry service provider expires.
