New Tie, Same Old Misogyny: J. D. Vance's Failed Rebrand
By Shannon Watts
Since becoming the vice presidential nominee almost three months ago, J. D. Vance has taken almost constant fire for his long history of denigrating women, including comments on podcasts about the tragedy of remaining childless, the misery of women who work outside the home, and the duty of every post-menopausal woman to serve as stop-gap childcare for her family. As a result, Vance has the worst net favorability rating for any vice-presidential candidate in history and has become a walking meme for masculinity gone wrong.
Last night, in an attempt to shed that electoral albatross, we watched in real-time on live television as Vance attempted a calculated rebranding of himself as an ally to women everywhere.
From the glaring symbolism of Vance’s Barbiecore tie (instead of the traditional red tie Republicans typically wear) to his constant shoutouts to the women “very dear to me” (including his mother, grandmother and several anonymous women he claims to know who have been through some things), Vance worked hard to project feminine energy—someone who listens, who feels empathy, who might be open to changing his mind. But instead of embodying any of those things authentically, Vance’s debate performance came off like cosplay. This stab at a rebrand was as transparently pink-washed as his tie.
For me, Vance’s mask fell off a few times during the debate. It started when the two women moderators interrupted him for not following the agreed-upon rules, even cutting off his mic. Testy and defensive, Vance talked over them with the now-famous complaint, “The rules were that you guys weren’t going to fact check.” And even though he tried to camouflage it, Vance couldn’t disguise the misogyny that has underpinned his policy platform for decades. Moderator Margaret Brennan ended the exchange by quipping, “Thank you for explaining the legal process,” in a tone that struck a chord with every woman who has ever been mansplained to in a meeting.
When the issue of childcare came up, he implied he supported efforts to make it more affordable—even though he skipped the Senate vote for an expanded child tax credit. When abortion came up, Vance implied he didn’t support a national ban—when, in fact, he has stated publicly that he does. He told the story of a friend who needed an abortion in order to leave an abusive partner—but failed to mention the laws he supports would have instead prevented her from leaving.
But even more revealing, whenever issues like those were discussed, Vance made it clear that he sees those issues as only impacting women, as if they’re somehow untethered from any broad economic and societal implications or don’t also affect women’s partners, children, bosses, everyone. When he spoke about wanting the Republican party to become “pro-family in the fullest sense of the word,” he meant “making it easier for moms to afford to have babies.”
Even the new incarnation of Vance fails to understand that the “women’s issues” discussed during the debate are actually issues that impact everyone’s lives. The lack of high-quality, affordable childcare hurts parents, children, and employers alike. And restricting women’s rights restricts the freedom of all. We now live in a world where men are actively advocating for paid family leave and supporting abortion rights. But in his attempt to modernize his stance on these issues, Vance just wants to tell us about a woman he “knows.”
Despite Vance’s best efforts to rebrand, women wisely saw through his performance for what it was: performative. According to a CNN instant poll, after the debate Walz had the advantage among women, rising 18 points in favorability. The message is clear: We simply aren’t buying the “new and improved” Vance he’s trying to sell us.
Shannon Watts is an author, organizer, and speaker. She founded Moms Demand Action and recently organized one of the largest Zoom gatherings in history, mobilizing women voters for the 2024 Kamala Harris campaign. Her new book Fired Up is coming in 2025.
Can the Taliban Be Taken to Court?
  September 26, 2024 Greetings, Meteor readers, I’ve never been much of a space gal, (stars are for figuring out your life path, not like, science or whatever), but there is a black hole that is “spitting energy across 23 million light-years of intergalactic space.” And if that doesn’t put whatever’s happening here on Earth in perspective, I’m not sure what will. In today’s newsletter, we look at the big news out of the United Nations General Assembly, a brand-new Emmy winner, and an assault on the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. Plus, a bit of weekend reading. Just a little speck, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ON
AND:
 WEEKEND READING 📚On birth: Approximately 20,000 babies have been born in Gaza in the last year. Mothers have been delivering in dangerous conditions, and “four-month-olds understand what airstrikes are.” (Marie Claire) On coming back: One of the most intellectually honest writers of our time, Ta-Nehisi Coates, has a few words for you. (Intelligencer) On selling out: Puerto Rican rappers have been surprising some of their audiences by throwing their support behind a certain orange demon. But considering the protections that proximity to whiteness brings white presenting Latine rappers, is it really all that surprising? (Refinery29)  FOLLOW THE METEOR     Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? Subscribe using their share code or sign up for your own copy, sent Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
There Haven't Been This Many Conflicts Since WWII
  September 24, 2024 Queridas lectoras, Quiero desearles a todos un feliz Mes de Herencia Hispane y Latine. Sé que somos mas que un solo idioma, pero es una de las cosas que nos unen a muchos de nosotros. Eso y tambien siglos de opresión. Un tema para un día diferente 🤷🏼♀️. In today’s newsletter, we look at the attacks in Lebanon, learn more about Project 2025’s plans for the planet, and celebrate a new world record holder. In love and Spanglish, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ONOne more war: According to Vision of Humanity, there are 56 ongoing armed conflicts right now around the world—more than at any time since World War II. And over the last few days, one of them, the conflict in Lebanon, has become more deadly, with strikes from the Israeli military rattling the country. Nearly 600 people have been killed, including 50 children; nearly 2000 have been injured, and thousands more are now being displaced by violence. Israel says it is targeting the militant group Hezbollah, but the casualties are mainly civilian, and this should surprise no one—90 percent of wartime deaths are. And just as in every other zone of conflict, it is the women and children of Lebanon who will endure the brunt of Israel’s latest offensive. (If Hezbollah’s threats of revenge are to be believed, Israeli women will suffer as well.) It is an endless cycle that has claimed the lives of more than 10,000 women and children since October 7, not to mention the multitude of displaced Palestinians who will soon be joined by their Lebanese counterparts in refugee camps and asylum programs across the globe. It is untenable for Israel and its allies (like the United States) to sustain all these running conflicts, not just from an economic and political perspective, but from a human cost perspective. Women are the main drivers of most economies, but they cannot do that when they’re dead, displaced, or saddled with the disproportionate “secondary and lasting effects of war and conflict,” left behind to raise the orphans, to heal the wounded, to teach at the rubble that was once a school. Last week at Free Future 2024, Dr. Salamishah Tillet explained the paradox of expecting women to end gender-based violence this way: “Women have this unfair burden of being the primary community that's victimized and then that’s also held responsible for stopping the violence. So that paradox is impossible; it means we’re never gonna end the problem because we’re busy healing from the trauma…so if we’re going to end this epidemic, you actually need men and boys central to the movement.” She was speaking of personal assault and not war, but the analogy holds: What we all need now is for the men and boys sitting in war rooms to finally come to the decision that human lives—women’s lives—are worth the strenuous effort it takes to choose the route of diplomacy and compromise. AND:
 DOWER AT THE END OF HER THRU-HIKE (VIA INSTAGRAM)
  FOLLOW THE METEOR     Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? Subscribe using their share code or sign up for your own copy, sent Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
A Climate Story That Won't Depress You
Because that's not how Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson rolls.
BY CINDI LEIVE
Someone recently described Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson to me as a “magical human being,” which makes sense: She’s a marine biologist who somehow makes very dense climate science accessible, and she’s also a lot of fun (last week, she and actor Jason Sudeikis hosted a climate variety show at the Brooklyn Museum).
But her greatest magic trick is her optimism. In her new book, What If We Get It Right?: Visions of Climate Futures, a collection of interviews, data, poetry, and more, Dr. Johnson veers off the doom-and-gloom path of much climate coverage to go in a different direction. She talked to me by phone from near her home in Maine while a literal cricket chirped in the background.
Cindi Leive: Your title, What If We Get It Right?, implies that we can get it right—which is kind of a novel idea. So my first question is, do you really believe that?
Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson: I think the most important part of the title is the question mark! [Laughs.] I think it's important to be clear that getting it right does not mean a perfect world because the climate has already changed. We're going to be experiencing climate impacts regardless of what we do. But there are a wide range of possible futures. And we basically have all the solutions we need: We know how to shift to renewable energy. We know how to improve public transit…We know how to green our buildings. It's not a big mystery what we should do.
You mentioned a wide scenario of possible futures. Can you sketch them for us?
Well, one option is the trajectory that we've been on at least until the last few years, which is just letting the fossil fuel industry win, not reining in extraction and the burning of oil and gas and coal at all, and heading toward a climate apocalypse: the mega-floods mega-droughts, mega-fires, mega-hurricanes version of the future. And that's what we get from media. That's what we get from movies. Most of the content on climate that reaches us is like, It’s a horror story, and it's only going to get worse. And yes, we do want to avoid the worst-case scenario! But if we do all of this work, what do we get? That was my impetus for the book: to show the other side if we implement all the solutions we already have. We could essentially stop the Earth from warming further. We could add many more species living on this planet with us. We could [lessen] sea-level rise. That sounds like not that big a deal, but we're talking about hundreds of millions of people—the largest human migration in history!—who might not have to migrate because of sea-level rise. So the extent to which we rein that in really matters.
I think a lot of people, when they think about preventing climate change, still think that means they have to prioritize the health and well-being of people a couple of generations from now or half the world over above their own well-being. But you don't see it that way at all.
For so long we were told that this is a problem for our grandchildren. And it's not. The dire climate impacts are already upon us. And so the thought that we could just put off action—that ship has sailed. I personally also don't see this through the frame of sacrifice. Because we are already sacrificing by not doing anything—which is a choice with incredibly horrific consequences. And so doing something is actually the easier and better option and will absolutely pay dividends.
So much of the book is deliciously nerdy—really deep in the weeds of how you make change in so many extremely specific areas. I really liked the interview with Abigail Dillen [a litigator at Earthjustice] because I don't think that people think about the courts as having that much to do with our climate futures.
We absolutely don't think about the Supreme Court generally as a big environmental issue. You know, people have been so rightly horrified by the Dobbs decision overturning Roe versus Wade. We've missed the overturning of the Chevron doctrine which gives agencies deference in sorting out the details of how to implement the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act.
We have three branches of government, and they all have a major possibility to shape, to be blunt, the future of life on Earth. The fact that the United States is the largest emitter, historically, cumulatively, is something that shouldn't be overlooked. We try to blame other countries, but it really is us. So whether we get it right really matters because we set the status quo for policy in other countries.
I also loved the chapter with Ayisha Siddiqa and Xiye Bastida. Sometimes Gen Z activism gets dismissed, like “It's all about these big theatrical gestures and made-for-TikTok protests.” But this was an incredibly intellectually rigorous chapter.
There are a lot of young people who are serious strategists and organizers working on climate, and thank goodness, because we desperately need them. This is a multi-generation-deep movement right now. The biggest thing that came out of that conversation for me was: We really need to support this next generation. Their moral clarity is a compass that we need. When they say, you're setting our future on fire, it’s true, and we need to be accountable to them.
Your last climate book was four years ago. What feels different to you now?
The policy landscape is different. Since that first book was published, we've had the Inflation Reduction Act passed, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act passed, which is the largest investment in climate solutions in world history. And a lot of things are changing for the better. I have solar panels at my house because of those tax credits.
And this book is also dropping right before an election. How are you thinking about that, up and down the ballot?
First of all, this is a climate election. Who we elect will shape the trajectory of greenhouse gas emissions. We have at the presidential level, a choice between Donald Trump, who literally offered fossil fuel executives that for $1 billion in campaign donations, he would do their bidding once he got into the White House again. And then you have on the other side Vice President Harris, who was the deciding vote on the Inflation Reduction Act and signed that into law and has been there while things like the American Climate Corps were established, putting tens of thousands of young people to work on climate solutions. And down ballot, it is those local officials, the city council members. public utility commissioners, the school board, and the mayors who are deciding, do we have municipal composting? Are we expanding bike lanes and investing in public transit? Are we, you know, greening and insulating buildings and updating building codes, for example? All that sort of nitty-gritty is where change happens.
I’ve been partnering with the Environmental Voter Project, which was created on the understanding that there are about 10 million environmentalists in the US who have climate as their number one voting issue, who are already registered but who do not regularly vote. So if we can get some of those folks to head to the polls…They have a track record of shifting by percentage points the turnout in key places. If people are looking for a place to plug in before the election, I recommend that. The stakes are so high.
"The Women Who Have Refused to be Broken"
  September 19, 2024 Greetings, Meteor readers, It’s been an exciting week ‘round these parts. On Tuesday, we spent the day at the Ford Foundation’s Free Future 2024: Preventing Gender Violence Around the World—hearing from incredible leaders, advocates, artists, and one highly decorated gymnast, all working toward a world in which “no one else has to say ‘me too.’ ”  L-R: SOCCER PLAYER FARKHUNDA MUHTAJ; THE HONORABLE HARRIETE CHIGGAI, WOMEN'S RIGHTS ADVISOR TO THE PRESIDENT OF KENYA; OLYMPIC GOLD MEDALIST ALY RAISMAN; AND CULTURE CRITIC SORAYA NADIA MCDONALD. (PHOTO BY MONNELLE BRITT) Every speaker brought their own lens and insight—Black Votes Matter co-founder LaTosha Brown reminded us, “There has never been a fundamental movement that has not been held nurtured and girded by…the leadership of women.” Actor and activist Danai Gurira reiterated the importance of turning our focus to the African continent to “amplify the women who have refused to be broken and see a future we all need to follow.” And in a panel on taking the toxic out of masculinity, activist David Hogg noted, “Being a man isn't defined by putting down other people—it’s defined by helping to lift others up and building community.”  L-R: FREE FUTURE HOST SARAH JONES WITH PANELISTS TARANA BURKE, AND DANAI GURIRA. (VIA GETTY IMAGES) The day ended strong with a monologue from performance artist ALOK, who shared what they would say to their younger self: “The reason that people are seeking to oppress you is not because you are weak or fragile; it’s precisely because you are powerful and tremendous.”  THE TREMENDOUS ALOK (PHOTO BY MONNELLE BRITT) If you missed the livestream of the event (cohosted by the UN Trust Fund to End Violence Against Women, the Skoll Foundation, and us), you can still catch every revelatory word from folks like Tarana Burke, Fatima Goss Graves, Padma Lakshmi, Chase Strangio, Aly Raisman, Darren Walker, and global leaders like Jaha Dukureh of the Gambia, Dr. Emma Fulu of Australia, UN Women’s Nyaradzayi Gumbonzvanda, and more, right here. And watch our Instagram for highlights. Now let’s get into some news! xx Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ON
 WEEKEND READING 📚On always being there: Steve Burns, the original host of Blue’s Clues, has found a new way to show up for his now adult fans. (The New York Times) On unsolved cases: There are an estimated 21,579 Latinas missing in the United States right now. And authorities have, for the most part, stopped looking for them. (Refinery29) On the “perfect vagina”: A conversation about labiaplasty on reality TV reignited harmful conversations about what a vulva should look like. TikTokers are pushing back. (Teen Vogue)  FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? Subscribe using their share code or sign up for your own copy, sent Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
"That's Not How It's Gonna Go, Girl"
  September 12, 2024 Bonsoir, Meteor readers, Why the French? Because I’m still luxuriating in the Joan of Arc cosplay Chappell Roan wore for her VMAs performance, along with a red carpet look that would bring a Renaissance painter to their knees.  STARE DIRECTLY INTO OUR SOULS, QUEEN. (VIA GETTY IMAGES) In today’s newsletter, we’re talking about the importance of yelling back, how Trump’s lies have harmed Haitians in Ohio, and a little weekend reading. Au revoir, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ON“Not me, bitch”: MTV’s Video Music Awards were last night, and while there were a ton of exciting moments— Megan Thee Stallion’s pet snake; Jordan Chiles and Flava Flav; Taylor Swift just existing; Sabrina Carpenter and that alien— the night really belonged to Miss Chappell Roan, who took home the Moonman for Best New Artist, the first award of her career. But Roan made her mark before the show began. When a photographer on the carpet yelled “shut the fuck up” in her direction, she yelled back, letting him know she wouldn't be spoken to that way. Asked about the exchange later by Entertainment Tonight, Roan said, “I’m not taking this for the rest of my career; I’ve been famous for, like, one month. This is not how it’s gonna go, girl.” The fact that Roan, who is only 26, has the wherewithal to be this staunch about her boundaries, and the career she wants to have, is genuinely inspiring. If you’re under 35 and reading this, you probably grew up in the hyper-voyeuristic post-sex-tape age of celebrity, in which privacy and common decency were in scant supply, and the general feeling was a belief that being a public person means you belong to the public. But stars like Roan, Naomi Osaka, and Billie Eilish have been bucking the system to create a more tenable way to be famous. And while that may not seem like the most important thing in the world, think about the power of saying to millions of young fans that each of us should be entitled to our own private lives and the masters of our narrative. And also just the iconic choice of looking someone in the eye in the middle of a black carpet and screaming, “Not me, bitch!” Iconic. AND:
 WEEKEND READING 📚On restoration: Rebecca Nagle’s new book, By the Fire We Carry, is an intimate dive into a landmark court case that saw the largest return of Indigenous land in U.S. history. Take a look at this excerpt before you head to your local bookshop. (The Intercept) On night life: Queer Latine New Yorkers needed a place to let loose. Thus “Maricón” parties were born. (Remezcla) On the farm: Small Black-owned farms in the South are tackling climate change one crop at a time. (NPR)  FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? Subscribe using their share code or sign up for your own copy, sent Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
How Do You Season Your Pets?
  September 11, 2024 Greetings, Meteor readers, I hope you all had a fortuitous bingo night last night. Personally, I am writing a complaint to our bingo card maker for not having the foresight to include a box for “they’re eating cats and dogs in Ohio.” How did you miss such a predictable talking point, Bailey? Get it together. In today’s newsletter, we’re reminiscing about last night, bidding farewell to an icon, and appreciating the childless cat ladies in our lives. Grabbing the pepper grinder, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ONCan we even call it a debate?: Back in my day, a debate was an intense, well-researched sparring of words between people who knew what they were talking about, at least most of the time. But that’s not what we watched last night. Instead, the country had a front-row seat to the political equivalent of the final rap battle in 8 Mile. Vice President Harris was armed with razor-sharp attack lines like, “Donald Trump was fired by 81 million people,” all of which were designed to get under Trump’s skin, and all of which worked. And in true Trump fashion, instead of having some sort (or any sort) of game plan, he decided to freestyle. But you’re not a rapper, Don. The felon was flustered, reactionary, fumbling over his words. He wouldn’t look directly at “her” and “she” shut him down swiftly. (His use of the Vice President’s pronouns but never her name or her title felt like classic meant-to-belittle Trump.) Said Harris: “He’s trying to, again, divide and distract from the reality, which is: It is very well known that Donald Trump is weak and wrong on national security and foreign policy. It is well known that he admires dictators, wants to be a dictator on day one, according to himself.”  And he wasn’t just shut down by his opponent—for once, the moderators were ready with the fact check. When Trump lied and made the debunked argument that Democrats have made it legal to kill babies after birth, Linsey Davis clarified on live TV, “There is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it's born.” When journalists have to explain that infanticide is illegal in America, we’ve really lost the plot. (But if you want to know more about the history of that nasty little myth, Jessica Valenti’s got that here.) So, did we actually learn anything from this debate? The Trump we saw on TV was an angry, uninformed, and unqualified man trying to get a job he was already fired from. No revelations there. The display of Kamala Harris's adaptability, though, feels important and worth noting. The woman we saw last night was not the jovial “Momala” of memes and home cooking videos, but instead the Harris of Congressional hearings—skewering her opponents with sharpness and wit. She was a tactician, fully aware of her enemy and prepared to face him head-on, no matter how many times he tried to pretend she wasn’t in the room. It was satisfying to watch her unleash her master-class psychological jiu jitsu on one of the least likable men of all time. As Jessica Bennett wrote in The New York Times, “she laid bare the smallness of Trump’s manhood and asserted her own power.” There were also the brief moments where we actually got to hear about Harris’s agenda, certainly more than the “concepts of a plan” Trump shared. She gave air time to her stances on increasing child tax credits, restoring abortion rights, and tightening gun laws. Some of her other talking points, however, like support for fracking, maintaining the status quo of foreign relations, and her aversion to an Israeli arms embargo may not have inspired those still undecided. What is unquestionable about the debate, though, is that it was a battle. And as the great poet once said, “This guy don’t wanna battle, he’s shook.” AND:  MADONNA AND CHILD, 2024 (SCREENSHOT VIA INSTAGRAM)
 FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? Subscribe using their share code or sign up for your own copy, sent Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
What Is "Reunification Therapy"?
  September 5, 2024 Good evening, Meteor readers, Yesterday, on my morning drive, I saw a family posing on their stoop with big smiles and a sign proclaiming the first day of school for the four kids in uniforms. Their mom, snapping the photo, directing everyone to squish together, seemed so excited. I thought of that family when, a few hours later, news broke of a school shooting in Georgia—the 385th mass shooting this year, and the 23rd on a K-12 campus. The families at Apalachee High School woke up that day—just like my neighbors—dressing up their children, ready for a fresh start, trusting they’d come home safe. But now, four families are burying a loved one, and a community is irreparably damaged. And the name Apalachee will join Uvalde, Sandy Hook, Parkland, Columbine, Covenant, Marysville, Oxford, and on, and on, and on. And it feels like all we can do is ask the same questions over and over again: When will prayers become policy? Whose child will be the last straw? If not for them, then for who, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ONIt’s okay to separate a child from their abuser, actually: You may have read about the recent case out of Colorado in which a retired police officer who allegedly sexually assaulted his daughters currently walks free, while their mother is going to jail for trying to keep her children away from him. It would be easy to write it off as a one-off miscarriage of justice—but advocates say that it’s actually typical of the way in which family court cases often prioritize the wishes of parents, even if they’re abusive, over the well-being of a child. The backstory is this: The father, a former police officer, faces seven felony charges for allegedly sexually assaulting three of his daughters, as well as one misdemeanor child abuse charge for allegedly attempting to drown his son, who had confronted him over the crimes. He currently seeks custody of his two other, younger children, who live in a domestic violence shelter with their mother. The children have been ordered by the court to attend reunification therapy, a controversial treatment used by family courts to settle custody disputes.  The children’s mother objects to the reunification therapy for several reasons: She believes the father is dangerous, and she worries about the effect the reunification therapy is having on her children. (Therapy sessions have left her children in the fetal position, crying uncontrollably, unable to sleep, and expressing thoughts of self-harm, she says.) So, she attempted to prevent her children from attending these sessions—and is now being held in contempt of court and sentenced to jail time. But she’s not the only one objecting to reunification therapy: The treatment has come under fire from many family court reform and feminist groups, who charge it provides abusive parents continued access to their victims. “Common sense tells us you can’t force a child to have a relationship or force two people to have a relationship if it’s fractured or if there’s no bond in the first place," Tina Swithin, an advocate for family court reform, has said. "Especially in cases where there is abuse, this is further traumatizing these children." Some states have already passed bans and limitations on court-ordered reunification therapy, such as requiring both parents' consent or prohibiting the use of "reunification camps," where children are sent with their alienated parent and cut off from their primary caregiver. But in many cases, its use is still widespread due to what the United Nations Human Rights Council calls "harmful gender stereotypes and discriminatory gender bias among family law judges." “Judges are suspicious about who is making the domestic abuse allegations,” attorney Suzanne Zaccour explained to Ms. “Often the woman might appear 'crazy' because she has suffered the impact of trauma and to them that makes her less credible…It's more comfortable to accept the explanation that women are crazy rather than that many men are violent...Judges cling to the idea that domestic abuse is rare and an exception." Children have a wide array of extremely valid reasons they may not want to remain in contact with a parent. And as long as family courts continue to prioritize reunification at all costs, they’ll quickly find that the cost is the child’s well-being—and, in too many cases, their life. —Bailey Wayne Hundl AND: 
 WEEKEND READING 📚On being left out: There’s a specific group of women feminism forgot about: cheerleaders. (The 19th) On funds: Black women at the helm of abortion funds across the country are bringing reproductive justice to the masses. (Essence) On the sheets: A question for all to consider: “Was casual sex always this bad?” *cough* yes *cough* (The Cut) On the job: Guards at Rikers Island accused of assault are mysteriously still working at the jail. And some of them didn’t even know allegations had been made until journalists started asking questions. (Gothamist)  FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? Subscribe using their share code or sign up for your own copy, sent Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
Be the Chappell Roan of Your Own Life
  August 27, 2024 Greetings, Meteor readers, Inexplicably, we are in the final week of August, and on my drive this morning, I saw children in school uniforms making their way up the street. Why does it feel like autumn is creeping up on me like the villain in an M. Night Shyamalan film? In today’s newsletter, we’re sipping some coffee and reflecting on Chappell Roan’s reminder about workplace boundaries. Plus frightening updates out of Afghanistan, and how anti-trans legislators are also killing period poverty bills. No attachments, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ONBoundaries: Last week, Chappell Roan hit the internet like rompompapom with a simple request: “Please stop touching me. Please stop being weird to my family and friends.” The ask was part of a longer statement Roan released on Instagram laying out her personal boundaries, making it very clear that when she’s not at work, she is fully clocked out and doesn’t want to be harassed by “superfans” or touched in public. “There is a part of myself that is just for me, and I don’t want that taken away from me.” And as is the case when a woman in public dares to establish a boundary, it was not well received by some. Disgruntled fans posted response videos online (Roan wisely turned off commenting on the original post) and wrote things like, “We made you” and “It’s the cost of being famous.”  THE FACE OF A WOMAN WHO WILL NOT BE BOTHERED. (VIA GETTY IMAGES) But Roan hits on the larger, darker problem behind the abusive “superfan” behavior that we’ve come to accept as a part of the fame package. There are numerous documentaries about famous people who were sexualized, stalked, harassed, and in some cases attacked by people who professed to be true fans and as we collectively look at those stories in hindsight, it’s easy to say, wow someone should have done something back then. What Roan is telling us in her post is that this is the “back then” moment where something can be done so that a decade from now, we’re not watching the documentary that explains how her career ruined her life. Her pushback against always-on expectations also reflects a social shift that even those of us without fans are feeling. A new report found that workers between the ages of 25-34 are taking 29 percent more sick days than their older colleagues. “People are missing work because they're overwhelmed or burned out, or they just need a day to reset,” researchers found. And when they are at work, more and more people are taking their cut-off times seriously. Just yesterday in Australia a law went into effect designed to protect employees who “refuse to monitor, read or respond to contact or attempted contact outside their working hours.” Unsurprisingly, no such law exists in the U.S. (although an attempt is being made in San Francisco), which explains why even after a global pandemic changed the way we look at work, we’re still trying to figure out how to look at boundaries. So let this be your friendly reminder that you can be the Chappell Roan of your own life and tell your boss that super graphic ultra modern girls need to be fully clocked out after hours. AND:
 SCREENSHOT VIA GENERAL MILLS
 FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? Subscribe using their share code or sign up for your own copy, sent Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
What We Learned at the DNC
  August 22, 2024 Greetings, Meteor readers, I’ve been near tears all week and it’s not just because of this guy. But it’s college move-in week for lots of youngsters, including the eldest Gen-Zer in my family, and for anyone else out there trying not to weep in the doorway of a dorm room, we send hugs. In today’s newsletter, we’re looking at another reason you might be tearing up: the emotion on display at the Democratic National Convention—heading into its final night tonight and a Big Speech from the candidate. Also, an alarming new study about LGBTQ+ asylum seekers, and, of course, your weekend reading list. Congrats to all the new freshmen, Shannon Melero  WHAT'S GOING ONWhat we saw at the DNC: The final night of the Democratic National Convention is upon us, and it’s been a rousing few days. There was Michelle Obama temporarily abandoning “we go high” to dunk on Trump the way only Michelle Obama can: “Who’s gonna tell him the job he’s currently seeking might just be one of those ‘Black jobs’?” There was the queen of the mic Oprah Winfrey reminding us that when a house is on fire, we try to save everyone—and if the place happens to belong to a childless cat lady, we try to get the cat out, too.” And there was Tim Walz stepping up to be America’s Ted Lasso, using what writer Jessica Bennett calls his “jock insurance” to show a warmer side of political manhood. Basically, the Party has never felt so in step with the actual people (sort of; we’ll get to that in a second). As incredible as the energy was on the main stage, it felt doubly charged at The Meteor and Emerge’s Power Lounge, where we heard from brilliant women, men, and non-binary people about the issues they care about. Deja Foxx and other Gen Z political players highlighted the economy as a Gen-Z issue; we hung out with Wonder Woman; we got inside the “White Dudes for Harris” movement; and, in what was really a breathtaking moment, several of the fierce and determined women who have testified about their experiences under abortion bans came together onstage to tell Busy Philipps why this issue matters so much. Of course, the Harris candidacy was a prime topic. As San Francisco Mayor London Breed said, in reference to the media’s usual handwringing about whether America is ready for a Black woman president, “They’re not ready? They better get ready.” One of the most powerful moments of the talk series came during a conversation with Rep. Jasmine Crockett. “We have to win this election because there is danger lurking around the corner,” she said. “I don’t think people should be convinced their freedoms can’t be cut. So if you think that you’re safe, I promise you, you are not. This isn’t about whether you agree with abortion or not. This is about whether you think we should live in the land of the free.” You can view all of the Power Lounge panels here, but we highly suggest starting with the video below.  However, while the goal of the DNC was inclusion, not quite everyone got an invite to the main stage. Missing from the grand narrative of the DNC’s success have been Palestinian voices. While protests continue inside and outside the convention center, with activists and delegates applying pressure on the Democratic party to put their full force behind an “immediate and permanent” ceasefire, on-stage speakers have either chosen silence or shared vague statements about ceasefires. Meanwhile, the Uncommitted Movement spent the week making their presence felt and spoke to whoever was willing to listen, including our favorite OB-GYN, Dr. Heather Irobunda. That issue won’t be going away any time soon: Once the confetti is swept away and the celebrities, speakers, and delegates go their own way, the Harris campaign will still have to, as Rep. Crockett said on her panel, “connect with people on a deeper level.” They will still have to show voters that all of this hope and enthusiasm will convert to action and a presidency that reflects the needs of all Americans. And that would be truly historic. AND:
 THIS MAN JUST WANTS TO GO HOME TO HIS DUNKIES AND CIGARETTES.  WEEKEND READING 📚On 📠: Who fact-checks the fact-checkers? (Popular Information) Sobre El Amor es Ciego: Netflix recently wrapped up its first season of Love Is Blind: Mexico which, like its American predecessor, had a little bit of everything, including unabashed colorism. (De Los) On a good tax: What could a carbon tax do for the economy? For starters, it could fund universal basic income. (Atmos)  FOLLOW THE METEOR Thank you for reading The Meteor! Got this from a friend? Subscribe using their share code or sign up for your own copy, sent Tuesdays and Thursdays. |
