Her life-saving abortion would have been a "crime"

 

Avatar photoby The Meteor

How Much Do You Know About Menopause?

A new documentary might teach you things about your own body that your doctor won’t.

By Vivian Manning-Schaffel

The migraines, joint pain, night sweats, and debilitating brain fog began in my mid-forties. With two young children to keep up with, there wasn’t enough coffee in the world to make me feel present. I had an inkling I might be perimenopausal, but no one—not even my OB/GYN at the time—sat me down and told me what I was experiencing was normal, let alone offered me treatment options.

I, for one, would’ve greatly appreciated if a new documentary, The M Factor: Shredding the Silence on Menopause, came out a decade ago when my hormonal shenanigans began. Produced by Tamsen Fadal and Denise Pines, it’s airing tonight, Wednesday October 17, on PBS, right in time for World Menopause Day on 10/18. It’s the first menopause film to earn medical accreditation, meaning doctors and nurses can earn credits just by watching it.

In 2025, more than 1 billion women worldwide will be in menopause, after a five-to-ten-year period of symptoms ranging from hot flashes and mood swings to vaginal dryness and heart palpitations. Yet, even though menopause is as natural as puberty or childbirth, it has long been criminally neglected, under-researched, misdiagnosed, and mistreated. Too many women aren’t properly informed before the signs kick in, are gaslit or dismissed by their doctors when said symptoms show up, and end up feeling like they’re going insane. 

The documentary fills in some of these gaps, explaining what to expect when you’re done with the possibility of expecting from a medical, emotional, cultural, and historical perspective. In the absence of widespread guidance, some of the doctors featured have become revered social media heroes. For example, Dr. Lisa Mosconi, a neuroscientist and author of The Menopause Brain, discusses her important study demonstrating how estrogen connects to brain health and cognitive function because we have estrogen receptors in our brains—one of many key findings in support of Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) as the gold standard of menopause treatment. 

It took a while to get to that gold standard: The documentary takes us through the devastating impact of a flawed as-hell 2002 Women's Health Initiative study falsely claiming HRT increased the risk of blood clots and breast cancer—a good section of the homogenous group of subjects were well into their seventies and could’ve been diagnosed with those conditions, anyway. Mary Jane Minkin, MD, a clinical professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at Yale School of Medicine who appears in the documentary, told me when this study came out, doctors stopped prescribing HRT, and menopause education in the U.S. all but ceased. More than 20 years later, she added, a study led by a colleague of hers proved less than a third of the OB/GYN residents surveyed were taught a menopause curriculum. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmrMwBh7l8w

Fortunately, a far more inclusive, age-appropriate, longitudinal study about women in midlife called the Study of Women’s Health Across the Nation eventually disproved the WHI study, restoring the credibility of HRT. For me, it took several years of complaining, writing an article about the efficacy of HRT, and a series of tests to convince my OB/GYN to give me a prescription. Now that my sleep has largely been restored, my joints feel better, and my brain fog has immediately cleared, I mourn the years I struggled through symptoms for absolutely no reason. 

The documentary takes care to note that menopause isn’t a one-size-fits-all experience. The severity and length of symptoms can vary greatly depending on who you are; they can last an average of 4.8 years for Japanese-American women and an average of 10.1 years for Black women. It also delves into the dark history of inequities of gynecology, including how Black enslaved women’s bodies were experimented upon by American gynecologists and the fact that Black women still suffer adverse outcomes and maternal mortality at disproportionately high rates. 

Things seem to be slowly changing for the better: President Biden signed an executive order that allocates 12 billion dollars to women’s midlife research—something Minkin hopes will further inspire young medical students to follow in her footsteps: “I try to trick my medical students into going into menopause research because I guarantee you there’s a Nobel prize for the person who can figure this out,” she says in the documentary. 

The filmmakers hope all women will learn more about menopause—even if they’re not there yet. Whether or not we eventually seek treatment for symptoms is up to us, but Sharon Malone, MD, another certified menopause practitioner, says in the doc that we may be doing our bodies a disservice by white-knuckling it. “The option should be, ‘I’m going to go, I’m going to get this addressed’ not ‘I’ll just suffer through and it’ll be over in a decade,’” she says. “You’re doing far more harm than good by just not addressing what the issues are.”

 

Vivian Manning-Schaffel is a journalist and essayist who covers entertainment, culture, psychology, and women’s health. Her Substack, MUTHR, FCKD, covers pop culture through a feminist Gen X lens.

Avatar photoby The Meteor

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.

Avatar photoby The Meteor

Can the Taliban Be Taken to Court?

 

Avatar photoby admin

There Haven't Been This Many Conflicts Since WWII

 

Plus: Hispanic and Latine Heritage Month is underway ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

Avatar photoby The Meteor

A Climate Story That Won't Depress You

Because that's not how Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson rolls.

BY CINDI LEIVE
Marine biologist and real-life planeteer Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson  (via Getty Images)

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.

 

Cindi Leiveby Cindi Leive

"The Women Who Have Refused to be Broken"

And what we owe them ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

Avatar photoby The Meteor

"That's Not How It's Gonna Go, Girl"

 

Avatar photoby The Meteor

How Do You Season Your Pets?

 

And other questions raised by the debate ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

Avatar photoby The Meteor

What Is "Reunification Therapy"?

Not as pleasant as it sounds ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

Avatar photoby The Meteor