An “Attack on Diplomacy Itself” and the Women Left Behind
  July 1, 2025 Hi friends— Cindi here, filling in for Nona and Shannon on what is not just a normal Tuesday in end-times America but a birthday blockbuster: Both Princess Diana (who should have been turning 64 today 💔) and Missy Elliott (blowing out 54 candles) were born on this day. Also on this day, back in 1972, the first standalone issue of Ms. magazine was published. That makes it an excellent time to shamelessly plug “Dear Ms.: A Revolution in Print,” which airs on HBO tomorrow. My fellow producers and I hope you get a chance to watch. Meanwhile, in today’s newsletter, everything from wedding-dress tariffs to a fascinating interview about the history of the word “like.” But first, an important piece about the real cost of the Trump administration’s dismantling of a lifesaving State Department office—by a woman who worked there. Xo, Cindi  WHAT’S GOING ONThe U.S. is Abandoning Women’s Rights. The Women it “Honored” Are Paying the Price.BY VARINA WINDER In March 2024, Agather Atuhaire stood on the White House stage, honored for her work as a human rights lawyer and anti-corruption journalist in Uganda. A year later, she was allegedly tortured and brutally assaulted, and left at the Tanzanian border, after being arrested and prevented from attending the trial of an arbitrarily detained politician. The response from the Trump State Department? A four-line statement from the U.S. Embassy in Tanzania calling for an investigation. At the same time, back on Capitol Hill, Secretary Marco Rubio was doubling down on his intention to dismantle the very office that would normally lead the charge on helping Atuhaire—the Secretary’s Office of Global Women’s Issues. The elimination of that office, in which I proudly served for more than a decade, is scheduled to occur this very week. Along with the dismantling of USAID and the Department of Labor’s Women’s Bureau, it is a clear signal that the U.S. is regressing wholesale on women’s rights. And governments like Tanzania’s have already taken note of the new latitude they have to do the same.  THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HONORED WOMEN THIS SPRING, EVEN AS IT PLANNED TO SHUT DOWN THE OFFICE. (VIA GETTY IMAGES) Women like Atuhaire—who trusted that American recognition meant American support—now face retaliation with no meaningful backing from the U.S. Our message to human rights leaders is now: we will honor you on our stage—as Rubio did at this year’s International Women of Courage (IWOC) Awards Ceremony—but when you need us most, we will turn our backs on you. More than 200 women from 90+ countries have received this award over the past 19 years. It’s not just a glass plaque and a ceremony; IWOC has been a living commitment to women’s rights – and has long created new opportunities to make meaningful progress, as quiet, coordinated U.S. diplomacy did together with one of Atuhaire’s fellow honorees, preventing a reversal of a ban on female genital mutilation in the Gambia. Now, human rights organizations worldwide question whether association with America makes their staff and beneficiaries targets—rather than protecting them. The very concept of American soft power—our ability to influence through shared values rather than coercion—depends on us standing by those values. The Tanzanian government’s alleged willingness to torture and rape a woman the United States honored on its highest stage is a clear sign of just how much the estimation for America’s purported human- rights values has already fallen.  WOMEN IN KENYA WORKING AGAINST GENITAL MUTILATION WITH THE SUPPORT OF UNICEF AND THE WOMEN’S ISSUES OFFICE. (PHOTO COURTESY OF VARINA WINDER) This institutional dismantling of my former office follows the same non-logic of the self-imposed destruction of USAID. This is not about efficiency: our tiny staff is the only dedicated, expert staff on these issues, as a mere 8 percent of State Department bureaus and offices globally have someone with “women’s rights” as a dedicated part of their job, along with an average of nine additional duties. This is not about efficiency or cost savings; our $10 million budget is spent by the Pentagon in the time it takes to watch a YouTube video. This is a coordinated, multi-front attack on women’s rights, the organizations that support them, and the leaders who believe in them. It’s also an attack on diplomacy itself. When we eliminate the infrastructure, the people, and the office that support our values, we don’t just lose a dedicated office; we lose credibility and trust. As Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) said in an SFRC budget hearing with Secretary Rubio in May, “Beijing is making the case that they are a more reliable, credible partner than the U.S.” The path forward requires more than defending the Office of Global Women’s Issues – which we each must be calling on the Senate and House to do. It also demands acknowledging that our retreat from human rights leadership has real victims with names and faces and bodies. Atuhaire’s brutal rape and torture may have happened in Tanzania, but the failure of accountability is America’s. She trusted us; we failed her. Varina Winder is the former Chief of Staff and senior advisor in the Secretary of State’s Office of Global Women’s Issues. AND:
 Three Questions About…Like, Words and StuffJournalist Megan Reynolds takes up the most derided word in the dictionaryBY SHANNON MELERO  IT’S JUST LIKE, A REALLY INTERESTING BOOK. (COVER IMAGE COURTESY OF HARPER COLLINS, AUTHOR PHOTO BY CHRIS BERNABEO) Megan Reynolds has always had a way with words, which I experienced firsthand when we worked together at Jezebel, and she told me I could always go to her with any questions. Big mistake, huge! I’ve been pestering her since 2019, and now I have yet another reason: Megan—who has made everything from beach chairs to a really big mall come alive with her deft use of language,—has a new book, Like: A History of, Like, the World’s Most Hated (and, Like, Misunderstood) Word. In it, she traces the word’s origins all the way back to the 1600s, and also writes a love letter to the way women, particularly teen girls, have shaped language. As is our routine, I darkened her door with my queries. So even though women are the ones making fetch happen when it comes to language, this book exists because there’s so much pushback and policing over women’s use of “like.” So I guess my question is, why can’t we just, like, talk how we please? The answer is absolutely “sexism,” but that is a pat response for a situation that is much more nuanced and complex. Sometimes the call is coming from inside the house—for all the professional men out there who write earnest LinkedIn blogs about filler words, power, and corporate communication, there are just as many professional women doing the same thing. The policing comes in many forms, [including] the voice in your own head, but I’d say that it is most evident in the aforementioned blogs on LinkedIn and op-eds in various newspapers around the world. And, if you watch the season premiere of the most recent season of The Kardashians on Hulu, you’ll find the entire family policing Kourtney for saying like, like, all the time. On the surface, any policing of women’s language looks like and definitely is sexist, but underneath, is also the issue of intelligence and whether or not saying “like” a bunch when you talk means you’re not. And yes, this is a battle that both men and women face, but women (I assume) are more concerned with not sounding stupid, whereas men will happily open their mouths and share the first thought that comes to mind. One thing I love is that you described “like” as a word that does a lot of emotional labor, and it’s been doing so since before either of us was born. Have you come across a word that is taking on that same labor for the next generation? Or will “like” continue to be a timeless linguistic accessory? Language moves faster than any of us are interested in thinking about, but I think that “like” will never go out of style—and that’s actually good? It means that it’s become an inherent and natural part of speech, and for that, we are forced to stan. However, the youth of today are saying words in ways that I never could have imagined. The meaning of “literally” has changed in recent years due to young people using it in unorthodox ways, and I think a lot of people are pressed about that for reasons unbeknownst. Technically, “literally” does mean just one thing, and often, it’s used in situations that are decidedly not literal. And like “like” can function as an intensifier, “literally” does the same thing. You write about how Serious Feminists™ of the past were also a part of the anti-Like movement. Is there still a sense that we need to sound important if we want to be important? Like with most things in life, the answer depends on the person. I’ve worked with women who are younger than me but much more “professional,” hewing closer to the traditional and generally accepted definition of what that sounds like. To me, this doesn’t matter at all. And because I’m generally not that “professional” by any commonly-held, old-fashioned standard, my aim in writing this book was to communicate that we don’t need to care about this! It doesn’t matter! If someone is or isn’t going to take you seriously in the workplace or anywhere else, I’d wager that they’ve already made that decision before you even opened your mouth, anyway.   FOLLOW THE METEOR     Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? |
