Nigeria Replaces India as Home to Most in Extreme Poverty

Extreme poverty is increasingly common in Africa according to a Brookings Institution report.

A snapshot of what poverty means in Nigeria (Source: Daily Trust).

Imagine living on $1.90 or less a day, struggling even to access basic necessities. 767 million people in the world fit that description, according to a 2013 survey (the last comprehensive survey on global poverty): 1 in 10 people. The World Bank describes such people as “predominantly rural, young, [and] poorly educated.” For a long time India has been home to the most people living in extreme poverty. But Nigeria is now number one for most people in extreme poverty, according to Brookings Institution, a DC public policy nonprofit.

This change reflects a geographical shift in extreme poverty. Once extremely common in Asia, economic progress has helped to eliminate a significant proportion of extreme poor. The trend in Asia reflects worldwide trends since the 1990s that have seen rates of extreme poverty decrease by more than 60% according to the World Bank. Progress in India also reflects progress with the international Sustainable Development Goals, set in 2016, that seeks to eliminate extreme poverty by 2030. Since the goals were set in 2016, 83 million have escaped extreme poverty.

However, the progress in India has not been praised by everyone. Some wonder if the reported progress illustrates continued rural distress and worries about job creation in India. Another potential criticism is about what poverty means. For India, a middle-income country based on its per capita income, its poverty line is $3.20 or less per day according to the World Bank. This means poverty is less defined by living on the edge of hunger and more on having an income that can access opportunities of a growing economy, according to a financial editorial in Mint.

Meanwhile, extreme poverty has become the unwelcome status quo in Africa. This is most notable in statistics, calculated through the IMF’s World Economic Outlook and household surveys, provided by the World Poverty Clock. It states as six people enter extreme poverty per minute in Nigeria, 44 leave it in India. More generally, 87 million Nigerians (44% of the population) live in extreme poverty while 70.6 million (around 5% of the population) live in extreme poverty in India.

Further, Nigeria is only a part of the extreme poverty in Africa. Two-thirds of Africans live in a state of extreme poverty and 14 of the 18 countries that have rising numbers of extreme poor are located in Africa. Indeed, on track to be number two for extreme poor is the Democratic Republic of Congo.

The theme of poverty in Africa also depicts difficulties in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. When it was implemented in 2016, the pace required to eliminate poverty by 2030 was 1.5 people every second. However as countries have slowed down in eliminating poverty, the actual pace is remarkably less—by 2020 it could be 0.9 people per second. The difference in pace will make it difficult to eliminate poverty by 2030 if not impossible, especially as the required pace to get back on track for the goal is 1.6 people per second.

In spite of the difficulties, eliminating global poverty is a priority for many charitable organizations. One is The Borgen Project, a Seattle nonprofit who hopes to be “an influential ally” for the world’s poor by building “awareness of global issues and innovations in poverty reduction.”  The Borgen Project builds awareness by advocating for poverty-reducing legislation by meeting directly with members of Congress or staff. They also hold members of Congress accountable for blocking poverty-reducing legislation.

The Borgen Project’s success is especially evident in the passing of the 2017 Reinforcing Education Accountability in Development (READ) Act. The Act holds the US accountable for ensuring access to basic education in war-torn and developing countries. Basic education encourages economic growth by equipping people with skills needed to participate in the global marketplace— an important step to reducing poverty.

Another successful organization is international organization Oxfam, which hopes to create “lasting solutions to poverty, hunger, and social justice.” Oxfam strives to create such systemic change through social justice advocacy of legislation that reduces poverty; disaster response improvements; and public education about the causes of poverty. Oxfam also focuses on programs that educate individuals about their rights or address inequalities in resource accessibility— such as clean water initiatives.

These programs cultivate local partnerships and networks with a focus on “locally informed and locally driven solutions.” For example, after over ten years of working with local communities and government authorities to minimize the impact of disasters on poor people, El Salvador was able to swiftly respond to the October 2011 flood. More importantly, when a village (La Pelota) received unclean drinking water, they asserted their right to clean water by sending it back to the authorities.

Both organizations show work that has been directly done to eliminate poverty. Like other organizations that focus on global poverty, they strive to enforce systemic change by targeting root issues. These include a lack of education— of individuals about their rights as well as the general public, a lack of adequate resources, and a lack of legislation that addresses the poor. Whether it is by 2030 or later, it is possible to imagine a future where extreme poverty does not exist. Many individuals already do.

TERESA NOWALK is a student at the University of Virginia studying anthropology and history. In her free time she loves traveling, volunteering in the Charlottesville community, and listening to other people’s stories. She does not know where her studies will take her, but is certain writing will be a part of whatever the future has in store.

The Calais Jungle: The Good, the Bad, and the Playwrights

Immigration is a challenge that meets all relatively stable governments and countries offering political asylum. The issue is not solely a hot topic in the United States. In fact, Trump’s suggestion to build a wall is a concept that is being orchestrated to control immigration to the UK from the Northern part of France. This area of Northern France, called Calais, is largely undeveloped but not largely uninhabited… The region has been nicknamed the “Jungle” for its history and conditions.

The two European governments are choosing to handle immigration facilitated via a railroad system called the Eurotunnel that goes under the water passage through the construction of a 13 ft wall. The water passage has served many brave and desperate immigrants either a life or death sentence, literally. The wall will cost a lofty 23 million dollars, funded by both countries.

The Calais Jungle is known as a refugee camp that has historically amassed a number of illegal immigrants, many of which are escaping their native countries of Yemen, Syria, Sudan, Iraq and Somalia. The camp has a long history beginning in 1999 with the opening of a migrant center to facilitate those attempting to reach the UK. By the year 2002, the camp had grown to an unmanageable 2000 individuals. The camp, not fully backed by the French government could not support the steady increase of needy people, and thus, closed abruptly. However, the establishment of these people without a safe place to which they could return meant the area became an unofficial “jungle” home. The immigrants courageously and stubbornly determined to reach the UK continued to arrive to the area. The unofficial and illegal camp became a growing, makeshift society of people with ominous backgrounds seeking a singular goal- a better life in a more objectively stable country. The illegal nature of the camp meant that it was quite dirty, unorganized, and unsafe according to several volunteers. In an attempt to eradicate this development that the government refused to support, the camp was bulldozed in 2009. In spite of their efforts to eliminate the inhabitants from this region of France, the community persisted.

The camp reopened and regained a significant amount of immigrants from the years of late 2014 to the camps official closure in October of 2016. This time period of a year and a half were monumental in the immigrant crisis that existed in this space. The camp grew to a fluctuating 10,000 individuals by 2016. Violence, poverty, and a community completely unsupported had become overwhelming. That said, it was not all ugly. The community had taken on its own personality.. The refugees had developed a functioning society among themselves and volunteers began appearing to help the many downtrodden peoples.

In 2015, two particular men arrived to the camp with ideas and a hope to change the lives through the devotion of their own. The two men, Joe Murphy and Joe Robertson, of Northern England and Oxford University came under their personal concerns about the growing migrant crisis. They eventually went on to raise money to create a community theater that would function within the camp. The theater was called “Good Chance and was used by a number of refugees for an array of purposes. One man of Sudan, in between his efforts to escape to the UK, found the theater as a place to participate in a band. This young man, known as Mr. Sarrar according to the New York Times, went on to seek asylum in the UK for for 5 years with a possibly indefinite residence in the future. He, along with many others, found the theater a place to play “upbeat music” and “dance the night away.”

While the camp was well-served by this theater, and the two men who built it created a sense of positivity among the inhabitants, the immigrant situation was nevertheless worsening. In October of 2016, the French government closed the camp and attempted to relocate all willing to regions throughout the country. The rest of the population returned to their home countries or, even in spite of the poor conditions in Calais, remained illegally.

As of 2018, the “jungle” is left only to those forlorn enough to live in what is now a dilapidated camp. Volunteers are still making trips to and from the region, raising money and attempting to help those refugees in desperate need. In February of 2018, two refugee groups engaged in violent acts over food handouts that resulted in 4 left in critical condition and dozens injured. Strict actions are being taken between the English and French governments to prevent further losses and to eradicate illegal movement of refugees between borders. The camp remains a relevant topic of concern.

As far as the British playwrights of the Good Chance Project, Mr. Robertson and Mr. Murphy, they resided as volunteers and theater coordinates up until the closure of the camp. They later went on to create the play entitled The Jungle that follows their experiences across a year throughout the camp. The play is used to raise awareness about the immigrant crisis that persists while telling a story of human existence, resilience, and inquiring about the role of external volunteers. The play began showing regularly in London this year as of June 16 according to The Guardian…

ELEANOR DAINKO is an undergraduate student at the University of Virginia studying Spanish and Latin American Interdisciplinary Studies. She recently finished a semester in Spain, expanding her knowledge of opportunity and culture as it exists around the world. With her passion to change the world and be a more socially conscious person, she is an aspiring entrepreneur with the hopes of attending business school over seas after college. 
 

Health Care Inequalities Impact Indigenous Communities

What are the Effects of Racism In Health Care Delivery in Canada and the US?

Research released the week of July 1 suggested health care inequalities among indigenous communities extended beyond the Northwest Territories’—where around half the population is indigenous—to all of Canada. The research says racism, in particular implicit racism, has contributed to unnecessary deaths among indigenous communities. Dr. Smylie, a Métis doctor and researcher, commented that “the most important and dangerous kinds of racism that people encounter is actually racism that's hidden.”

Yet implicit racism is not new: it has been the focal point of past studies, most notably the 2015 Wellesley Institute study “First Peoples, Second Class Treatment” also led by Dr. Smylie. The study suggested indigenous people either strategized their visits or avoided care completely due to the frequency of experienced racism. Such racism was commonly felt in a “pro-white basis,” according to Dr. Smylie, and negative stereotypes that originated in colonial government policies like segregation.

Michelle Labrecque’s prescription for severe stomach pain was merely a message to not drink (source: CBC news).

The findings of the 2015 Wellesley study underlined the unnecessary death of elder Hugh Papik in 2016. Even though Papik did not have a history of drinking, Papik’s stroke was mistaken for drunkenness. His death prompted an external investigation that made 16 recommendations for the Government of the Northwestern Territories. Four of the recommendations focused specifically on fostering relations between indigenous communities and health care professionals. All but two were adopted.

The recommendations included training staff—“policies for implementation of mandatory and ongoing culture safety training… in partnership with the Indigenous community”—in hopes of breaking down the root issue of systemic racism by confronting stereotypes. According to health minister Glen Abernethy, training will do so by incorporating information about the different cultures of the territory as well as a history of colonization for non-indigenous staff. In addition to the training, Abernethy hopes to increase the number of indigenous staff in the future by encouraging young locals to pursue medical careers so that they might return and serve their communities.

However, the messy entanglement of racism and health care is not unique to Canada. A 2017 survey by NPR, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health found 23% of Native Americans faced discrimination when “going to [the] doctor or health clinic” in the US.  

Even though the US federal government is obligated, through treaty agreements, to provide for the health of Native Americans, the IHS itself is too underfunded to provide adequate care. A 2014 study stated that “Long-term underfunding of the IHS is a contributing factor to AI/AN health disparities.”  Indeed, for people like Anna Whiting Sorrell who have struggled to get treatment in the past, it is no surprise that “a lot of American Indians simply put up with …“‘tolerated illness.’” Other care alternatives are also difficult to access as the American health care system makes it hard for many Native Americans to obtain care in the private sector.

Cartoon depicting the waiting room of an IHS facility-- and the struggles of the system (Source: Marty Two Bulls).

And while some communities have successfully started looking inwards at traditional forms of healing and eating to improve health, it is evident that many are doing so because outside systems of support are inadequate or nonexistent. Although Canada is actively trying to address inequalities in its health care, the US has yet to do so.

TERESA NOWALK is a student at the University of Virginia studying anthropology and history. In her free time she loves traveling, volunteering in the Charlottesville community, and listening to other people’s stories. She does not know where her studies will take her, but is certain writing will be a part of whatever the future has in store.

Searching for China’s Ancient Tea Leaves

Tea is the most popular beverage in the world, first cultivated over 6,000 years ago in ancient China. Shunan Teng is on a mission to experience it in its most authentic, historic form. Her love for tea knows no bounds, as she travels halfway around the world, up steep mountains and through remote jungles in search of the world’s oldest tea trees. Now, through Tea Drunk, a teahouse in New York City, she’s giving others the opportunity to be steeped in history.

Anthony Bourdain’s Window into Africa

Anthony Bourdain might have been a celebrity chef, but viewers of his Emmy Award-winning travel show, “Parts Unknown,” didn’t tune in for curry and noodle recipes.

Cooking was simply the conceit Bourdain used to have a conversation about the culture, politics, struggles and triumphs of people around the world.

As a human geographer, I was drawn to how Bourdain upended the travel show genre, telling compelling and complicated stories about people and places most Western viewers tend to view through a lens of simplistic stereotypes or caricatures.

Even more remarkable, his work wasn’t relegated to obscurity. The show aired on CNN – a mainstream cable outlet with millions of viewers.

I was especially interested in the way the show depicted Africa, a continent Western media tends to portray using what novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie famously called a “single story” – a monolithic narrative of poverty, backwardness and hopelessness.

So in a paper published last fall, I analyzed Bourdain’s Africa episodes, which took viewers to Congo-Kinshasa, South Africa, Tanzania, Madagascar and Ethiopia.

In them, he largely rejects the “single story” approach taken by much travel writing, and later travel television, since at least the 16th century. While the stories told about Africa in the West have changed over time, they’ve often lacked nuance and multiple voices – something Bourdain was eager to provide.

A ‘single story’ of horror and hopelessness

In the imaginations of many Westerners, Africa exists as a silent, docile, set piece – a contrasting “other.”

Sociologist Jan Nederveen Pieterse notes that for centuries – through deliberate lies and well-meaning mistakes – travel writers, missionaries and popular media outlets have wrongly depicted Africa as a place devoid of civilization, a frontier of wilderness and savagery.

The dominant narrative goes something like this: If the West is stable, Africa must be chaotic; if the West is mature, Africa must be infantile; and if the West is technologically advanced, Africa must be primitive.

Reality television and travel shows often deploy these tropes. Cultural anthropologist Kathryn Mathers has written widely on media depictions of Africa, suggesting that programs like “Survior: Africa” and Nicholas Kristof’s popular newspaper columns tell predictable stories of poverty and chaos with little effort to contextualize them within a larger history.

The dynamic voices of Africans – hardly a monolithic category – are often absent in these narratives. In the rare event they do appear, they’re often presented as people without politics who exist only to welcome tourists and protect rhinos. Intrepid conservation officers and overburdened health workers are favorite characters, along with the traditional leader, the street vendor and the small child in school uniform.

Cable news coverage of Africa also tells a “single story.” As Mathers wryly notes, when the continent does get coverage, the stories can be distilled down to the same topic: “the horrors of the hopeless continent, as seen on CNN.”

Bourdain’s critical lens

But Anthony Bourdain was also “seen on CNN.”

Beginning with his memoir, “Kitchen Confidential,” Bourdain built his persona as a speaker of unspoken truths. Likewise, he steered his travel show to “parts unknown” – or, more accurately, parts only known through incomplete tropes.

In each episode, Bourdain gives a brief historical overview to remind the audience that places are made by their histories. He doesn’t gloss over the difficult ones. For example, when explaining contemporary Congo, he implicates his American viewers:

“When the new country managed to inaugurate their first democratically elected leader, Patrice Lumumba, the CIA and the British, working through the Belgians, had him killed. We helped to install this miserable bastard in his place: Joseph Mobutu.”

When Bourdain is in Madagascar, he reflects on his own conflicted relationship to tourism and colonialism.

In Season 6, Ethiopian-born, Swedish-raised chef Marcus Samuelssonjoins him in Ethiopia. Together, they explore the theme of home in the context of the African diaspora.

While one might criticize Bourdain’s perspectives, he could never be accused of taking a sanitized, apolitical approach.

In the episode on Tanzania, he visits a Maasai village – a common pit stop for travel shows about East Africa. But “Parts Unknown” rejects the stereotype that the Maasai are an isolated, backwards tribe that exists apart from the modern world.

When a villager learns that Bourdain was born in New Jersey, he tells the host that his son attends university there. The conversation picks up again later in the episode, when Bourdain and the Maasai man thoughtfully ponder globalization and the anxiety and opportunity of social change. Bourdain understands that his African hosts aren’t anchored to a static past. Instead, they are dynamic actors in a global economy.

Bourdain writes his own reflections into each script. In Madagascar, Bourdain reminds viewers that

“the camera is a liar. It shows everything. It shows nothing. It reveals only what we want. Often, what we see is seen only from a window, moving past and then gone. One window. My window. If you had been here, chances are you would have seen things differently.”

The episode then cuts to previously rolled footage but reedited in the style of Mathers’ “horrors of the hopeless.” It’s all done to show the ease with which dominant narratives are packaged and to emphasize that “Parts Unknown” seeks to convey something entirely different.

The greatest strength of “Parts Unknown” was its comfort with unknowns remaining unknown – its resistance to arriving at singular truths about complex places. Bourdain never claimed that the “artifice of making television” – as he called it – allowed more than “one window, his window.”

Yet it was an open window, a critical lens that helped his large audience disentangle the tropes so often served up by popular media. Bourdain was critical of the single story, critical of widely held stereotypes and perhaps most critical of his own position as a masterful storyteller.

THIS ARTICLE WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED ON THE CONVERSATION

How Tampons are Hurting the Environment

...and what you can do to help.

Image Credit: HelloFlo

Disposable tampons and pads are something that almost every woman uses on a monthly basis without realizing the negative effect these products have on the environment. This is partly due to the cultural taboos surrounding menstruation that allow manufacturers to proffit and prevent the topic from becoming a global conversation. It seems counterintuitive that despite sustainable options in other everyday products, this necessary part of a woman’s life has gone unchanged for the past fifty years.

How are tampons hurting the environment?

The average woman will use between 11,000 and 16,000 tampons in her lifetime. Those tampons add up to about 250 to 300 pounds of waste, not including the resources used to produce and ship the tampons. And that is only the beginning: once the tampon is disposed of it will take six months to decompose (this doesn’t include the applicator or wrapper).

Also, tampons are partly made out of plastic and usually include a plastic applicator which contributes to plastic pollution worldwide. Plastic is unable to biodegrade, meaning that it continues to break down into smaller pieces which contaminate groundwater, hurt wildlife, and attract and carry toxins. Because only 8% of plastic is ever recycled, the rest piles up in landfills, becomes litter, and often ends up in the ocean. In the past ten years volunteers have collected over 20,000 tampons and applicators from British beaches alone.

Tampons and pads are also made from cotton that is heavily treated by pesticides, meaning that those toxins will seep into groundwater when the tampon is discarded. Also, because tampons are registered with the FDA as medical devices, manufacturers are not required to list ingredients meaning that there are likely many undisclosed toxins in tampons and pads.

What Can I Use Instead?

Fortunately there are many options for a more sustainable period. A popular alternative to the tampon is the menstrual cup, a medical grade silicone cup that catches menstrual fluid. Unlike a tampon, the menstrual cup can be worn for up to 12 hours and is completely re-usable, saving you the money spent monthly on tampons. Menstrual cups are also chemical free, allowing you to know exactly what you are putting in your body. http://divacup.com/

Another sustainable option is period panties. These are basically regular underwear with extremely absorbent padding that can take the place of a pad or tampon. Most retailers list the amount of menstrual fluid the underwear is able to absorb, allowing you to supplement with a menstrual cup as needed. https://www.shethinx.com/

Cloth menstrual pads are also available. These pads will last you up to ten years and are made from natural material so that they will biodegrade once you need to throw them away.

It’s time to move past tampons to a more sustainable alternative that is better for you and your world.

EMMA BRUCE is an undergraduate student studying English and marketing at Emerson College in Boston. She has worked as a volunteer in Guatemala City and is passionate about travel and social justice. She plans to continue traveling wherever life may take her.

Happiness and the Environment in Costa Rica vs. the United States

The Happy Planet Index, founded in July 2006 by statistician Nic Marks measures the wellbeing of a country’s citizens; it “shows that it is possible to live good lives without costing the Earth.” Marks is set on identifying the positive outcomes that environmental action can have on individuals, the planet, and on society’s well being -- steering away from the negative perspective of the future of the environment -- while showing that economic development is not the key to happiness.

The importance of happiness that Marks utilizes to measure the Happy Planet Index is notably explained in Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics. Aristotle asserts his belief that happiness is the final destination in life. He writes that when people make decisions “in the sake of honour, pleasure, reason, and every virtue” that “we choose them also for the sake of happiness, judging that by means of them we shall be happy”. Alternatively, when making decisions based on happiness, Aristotle believed that no one chooses happiness for the sake of anything other “than itself”. In summary, Aristotle believed that there is no explanation to the search for happiness, other than happiness is innate to human nature.

In Marks’s TedX talk at Oxford, England, he reinterprets Aristotle’s text stating that “we should be happy and the planet should be happy” and that happiness should be the goal “of every nation on the planet”. Marks then presents a graph of what people believe is most important in life ranking happiness first, health and love in second, and wealth in third. Despite these statistics, however, Marks discusses how western culture currently does not account for happiness when making decisions about the environment as they do with economic and materialistic gains. Most notably Americans continue to attribute happiness to wealth and success, when Costa Rica, the happiest place in the world, has a thriving environment and lack of economic wealth.

Costa Rica’s continuous ranking as the happiest country in the world is caused by an extremely low Ecological Footprint and highly efficient system of “generating long, happy lives in terms of the resources it consumes”, according to the Happy Planet Index. This way of life can be traced back to 1948 when Costa Rica peacefully abolished their army after a 44 day Civil War and dedicated their military funds to social, environmental and educational projects. Since then, the Costa Rican government has committed to becoming “carbon neutral in 2021” and produces 99% of its energy from renewable resources. Unlike western countries who target economic and technological advancements, Costa Rica focuses on accomplishing health and happiness through environmental action. The country is a jovial place brimming with happy, content people, despite their lack of advanced technology and economy.

Comparatively, the United States ranks 108th on the 2016 Happy Planet Index. America’s priorities, according to the Happy Planet Index, are not in order to produce a happy, sustainable society. Lauren Greenfield, creator of the collection of photos “Generation Wealth”, cogently captures America’s distorted desires. In her collection, Greenfield highlights America’s eagerness for opulence, wealth, inflated ego and lack of environmental awareness. Americans’ blatant disregard for anything but economic and technological advancements portrays why the United States ranks extremely low on the Happy Planet Index. They are unable to understand the detrimental effects that over-consumption has on their wellbeing and the environment. Taking care of the environment has a direct impact on an individuals well being. It is crucial that Americans understand and further integrate this correlation between the environment and happiness into daily life in order to create a healthy, happy and sustainable country.

The Happy Planet Index represents the necessity of taking care of the environment. Life and nature are precious, serene and beautiful. As a result, nature should not be sacrificed for the consumption of exorbitant amounts of resources and materials in order to redeem the economy or the ego. The assessment of the level of happiness of each country around the globe further demonstrates how environmental action also takes the format of a moral movement as it strives for happiness and peace with life and nature. Facing the environmental movement head on is essential to saving the planet from severe natural destruction and also achieving human’s one true end goal: happiness.

Jana Shemano is a student at the University of Michigan studying English and Psychology. She loves to learn, meet new people, gain different perspective, and have healthy debates. She also aspires to ski down Mt. Kilimanjaro.

Tribal Moscow - World Cup

You can hate it or love it, but you can't ignore it. World football is the thing that turns city alive. It unites the nations and let us enjoy the living.

Driving Ban Lifted in Saudi Arabia Encourages Feminist Movements

Saudi Arabia, known as the birthplace of Islam, has long maintained a social ban that forbade a woman’s right to drive. This ban prohibited women from the freedom of having a schedule and a life that exists outside the presence of their husbands, a human right that should come with modern life in a 21st century world.

On June 24, 2018, the world’s final ban prohibiting women from driving around at free will was removed in Saudi Arabia. This right, a right that has always existed for men, was finally equalized for women on a global basis. For years, the women of Saudi Arabia have had to fight for equal consideration within their country. While many laws still diminish their capacity to act as an independent, including their inability to withhold a job outside the home, their activism is certainly not a lost cause. Within the past decade, the women of Saudi Arabia achieved two life-changing rights with the authority to vote as of 2015 and, now, the lifted driving ban.

The right to drive is a right that transcends gender. The opportunity to move about freely in the world, even without a purpose, shapes the new reality for women in Saudi Arabia. Beyond the fact that driving laws should not factor in gender, it is an unrealistic inconvenience to modern life. Sometimes things happen, children get sick or a wife goes into labor while her husband is out. Sometimes, going for a drive in the car is exactly what you need, whether that drive is to watch the sunset and release a stressful day or a drive to the hospital in an emergency. These activities do not depend on gender. Rather, they express freedom. They demonstrate life. And all people, men and women alike, have a right to life.  

While the ban removal is monumental for the country, it means something much greater than simply the approval of a woman in the driver’s seat of a car. It brings to light the history of Saudi Arabia and pushes the world forward in its feminist movements. Saudi women have suffered a lack of rights that are commonplace in the majority of the world… So why is it this country is so far behind in their treatment of women? What does the lifting of this ban mean for their future?  

The intersection between the Islamic religion and society largely encourages strict laws regarding a woman’s place in society. Saudi Arabia, as the mecca of the Hajj and housing the most important Islamic tradition, is notorious for several laws that limit a woman’s right to consideration. Consider the fact that women only recently received the right to vote as evidence to this notion. Despite the equal rights momentum they are generating, women are still required to have a male guardian in many situations that usually only require one active individual. These scenarios include the decision to marry, travel outside the country, sign a contract, and others. Many of these laws extend into other countries that were once part of the Islamic empire.

Such laws have persisted on account of long standing religious beliefs and early defined cultural systems. Tradition is hard to reverse and reports of apprehension on behalf of some women and disapproval by some Saudi men come with the territory of change. That said, for the most part, women everywhere are celebrating- especially those who have suffered the silence of being enchained by their husbands rule. In 2017, when the law was first announced to be lifted the following year, women rejoiced…One woman reported to BBC upon this announcement, “I was very, very excited, jumping up and down and laughing. I’m going to buy my dream car, a convertible mustang, and it’s going to be black and yellow!”

There is much that remains to be overcome in the kingdom as their inability to work outside the home and their activism is still punished… In May of 2018, seven women’s rights activists were detained for speaking out against their unequal treatment and charged with working with “foreign entities.” The women were working towards more equality and basic human rights. Their right to free speech is clearly still not permissible behavior… Though the odds are heavily stacked against them, little by little, women around the world are finally finding their voices. They are shifting the world. They are changing their own lives. They are standing up against outdated systems and perspectives that make them small.

The rigorous laws that women are forced to comply with around the world and particularly in the Middle East are being challenged by many movements for equality. Tradition that has long supported the belittlement of a woman’s liberties is evolving. Women that have been silenced, hidden under dark clothing, waiting for their husbands to return from work before leaving the house, are becoming braver, fighting back… and the best part is, the world is finally listening. Silenced voices are now the loudest of all.

ELEANOR DAINKO is an undergraduate student at the University of Virginia studying Spanish and Latin American Interdisciplinary Studies. She recently finished a semester in Spain, expanding her knowledge of opportunity and culture as it exists around the world. With her passion to change the world and be a more socially conscious person, she is an aspiring entrepreneur with the hopes of attending business school over seas after college. 
 

Reasons to Decrease Your Meat Intake

What you eat affects your world.

By Michael McCullough. May 1, 2010.

Due to the advent of trendy vegan and vegetarian restaurants it is easy to dismiss the vegan diet as little more than a food fad — a here-today-gone-tomorrow movement with little scope beyond the instagrams of teenagers. And yet, this popular misconception allows many to dismiss the movement without ever really considering the many ethical reasons for going meatless. The truth is that the meat industry, especially in America, is a contributing factor to many of the environmental problems we face today.

Much of the problem lies in an overconsumption of meat. According to the New York Times, Americans eat about 8 ounces of meat a day — almost twice the global average. Americans also consume 110 grams of protein per day (75 of which are from animal protein) which is twice the level recommended by medical professionals. This overconsumption does not come without a cost. According to the UN’s food and agriculture organization, 30% of the earth’s ice-free surface is now dedicated to livestock production. The same study also says that the livestock industry is responsible for a fifth of the world's greenhouse gases, more than the entire transportation industry.

The meat industry also uses far too much water. One cow can drink up to 50 gallons of water per day and it takes 2,400 gallons of water to produce one pound of beef. (Compare this to the 244 gallons of water needed to produce a pound of tofu.) Run-off from factory farms is also a significant factor in river and pollution within the United States. Often factory farms dispose of animal waste by spraying it in a mist over fields, allowing the toxins and pathogens in the waste to permeate the surrounding environment.

In addition, while 800 million people worldwide suffer from hunger and malnutrition, most of the corn and soy grown goes to feed chickens, pigs, and livestock. This is despite the fact that it takes 5 times more land and 12 times more water to produce animal protein as opposed to plant protein. If meat production were decreased and crops of plant based proteins increased, hunger could be reduced.

There are many possible solutions to the meat problem. A good first step would be to eliminate the government subsidies which make up 31% of the global income of livestock companies. Another step could be to reduce meat intake by simply by eating less of it. It should be stressed that it is not necessary to become a vegetarian to reduce meat-related emissions. Merely cutting back on our daily meat intake can have a powerfully positive effect on the environment. Researchers at Oxford have found that reducing meat intake to levels prescribed by dietary professionals could help reduce food-related emissions by a third by 2050, while vegetarianism could cut emissions by 63%.

In America’s capitalist society, the best way to vote is with your money. By becoming a vegetarian, or merely reducing your meat intake you have the power to create a healthier, greener planet. Dr. Marco Springmann, lead author of the Oxford study put it best when he said, “We do not expect everybody to become vegan. But the climate change impacts of the food system will require more than just technological changes.” Adopting healthier and more environmentally sustainable diets can be a large step in the right direction.

EMMA BRUCE is an undergraduate student studying English and marketing at Emerson College in Boston. She has worked as a volunteer in Guatemala City and is passionate about travel and social justice. She plans to continue traveling wherever life may take her.

OMAN: The Pearl of Arabia

Oman is a place as surprising as it is unfamiliar. When the traveler explores its diverse landscape, formed by deserts, mountains, oasis and virgin beaches, he realises why this place is known as the Pearl of Arabia.

One thing that really stands out above all else in Oman is the kindness and closeness of its people and the authenticity of its culture.

Literacy… for Whom?

The significance of the Gary B. v. Snyder lawsuit dismissal.

Detroit students opened up the conversation on who has the right to education (Source: Steve Neavling).

On June 29, 2018 US District Judge Stephen J. Murphy III dismissed a federal class-action lawsuit, Gary B. v. Snyder. The lawsuit, filed in 2016 by Public Counsel and Sidley Austin LLP on behalf of a class of students, claimed the plaintiffs were deprived of the right to literacy. The decision will be appealed at the US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Although Judge Murphy agreed a degree of literacy is important for such matters as voting and job searching, he did not say it was fundamental: constitutional.  The central reasoning for the dismissal of the case was the suit failed to show overt racial discrimination by the defendants in charge of the Detroit Public Schools: the state of Michigan. The other reasoning Judge Murphy provided was that the 14th amendment’s due process clause does not require Michigan provide “minimally adequate education.”

Meanwhile the case brings up an important question its initial filing gave rise to: is literacy a constitutional right? One could argue the importance of literacy goes back to Reconstruction. According to Professor Derek Black, Southern states had to rewrite their constitutions with an education guarantee in addition to passing the 14th amendment before they could be readmitted into the US. Black states “the explicit right of citizenship in the 14th  Amendment included an implicit right to education.”

The theme of education and citizenship is a central component to the complaint’s argument for literacy as a fundamental right. It appeared in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education case too, which emphasized that education was “the very foundation of good citizenship.” The complaint drew on this citizenship theme to argue the importance of establishing elementary literacy tools—about the equivalent of a 3rd grade reading level. These can then develop into adolescent literacy skills, which allow an individual to comprehend and engage with words. Such engagement is what democratic citizens need when they are making decisions on who to vote; even more importantly, literacy is essential to understanding the often complex ballots voting requires. Further, literacy allows one to take part in political conversations.

The schools in question also “serve more than 97% children of color,” according to the complaint. Many of these students also come from low income families. On the 2017 Nation’s Report Card the average score out of 500 for reading was 182 for Detroit 4th graders, compared to the national average of 213 in other large city school districts. If the 1982 Pyler v. Doe case argued children could not be denied free public education that is offered to other children within the same state—in line with the 14th amendment—then why the disparity in scores?

The plaintiffs believe the disparity lies in deeply rooted issues in the Detroit Public Schools. They argue literacy tools that are first taught in elementary school are not only unavailable to them but that their schools are also not adequate environments for fostering education.The complaint mentions unsanitary conditions, extreme classroom temperatures, and overcrowded classrooms as environmental stressors. They also mention inadequate classroom materials as well as outdated and overused textbooks.

Worn history textbook from 1998 (source: Public Counsel).

Not only is the school environment not conducive to learning for these students but their teachers are often not the proper facilitators for learning. The complaint mention such issues as high teacher turnover, frequent teacher absences, lack of short term substitute teachers, inadequate teacher training, and allowance of non-certified individuals.  The complaint also states students at these schools may also have unaddressed issues related to trauma teachers are not trained for.

And the solution to these discrepancies could very well be what the plaintiffs are arguing for: make literacy, education, a fundamental right. In a 2012 Pearson study on global education systems, the US was number 17. All the countries ahead of the US had either a constitutional guarantee of education or a statue acknowledging the role of education. According to Stephen Lurie, this creates a baseline ruling of what education entails: a culture of education around which laws can form.

Such a baseline ensures education is not a question of privilege. Indeed such conditions as the complaint mentions, as lawyer Mark Rosenbaum stated, would be “unthinkable in schools serving predominantly white, affluent student populations.”  What Gary B. v. Sanders is asking for is a safe school environment, trained teachers, and basic instructional materials. It is asking that Detroit students are guaranteed a minimum of education that will at least give them the chance other students in Michigan have at becoming informed citizens and adults.

---

Teresa Nolwalk

Teresa Nolwalk is a student at the University of Virginia studying anthropology and history. In her free time she loves traveling, volunteering in the Charlottesville community, and listening to other people’s stories. She does not know where her studies will take her, but is certain writing will be a part of whatever the future has in store.

What Does the #MeToo Movement Look Like in France?

The sexual assault debate in the City of Love.

From the top of Notre-Dame Cathedral. By Pedro Szekely. April 28, 2018.

Last October in the US, a media firestorm erupted in response to many prominent actresses coming forward to accuse producer Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault. In the days after the story broke, women across the world were invited to share their stories of sexual assault and harassment using the hashtag #MeToo. In the safety of numbers, inumerable women came forward to share their experiences, exposing their bosses, CEO’s, and elite, powerful men to the scrutiny of society. But this is all old news. While the movement has had incredible success in America, it has had a different reception in other cultural climates, namely, France.

The French have historically taken a different perspective on sexual allegations than Americans. Take, for instance, the shock and horror Americans expressed when news of President Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky broke, versus the “c’est la vie” air expressed by the French in response to President Mitterand's affair with actress Julie Gayet.

In early January, French actress Catherine Deneuve joined 99 other well-known French women in an open letter to the #MeToo movement. The letter posed a critique of #MeToo, comparing it to a Stalinist “thought police,” and arguing that “what began as freeing women up to speak has today turned into the opposite – we intimidate people into speaking ‘correctly’, shut down those who don’t fall into line, and those women who refused to bend [to the new realities] are regarded as complicit and traitors.” To the crafters of the letter, #MeToo represents a “hatred of men and sexuality,” an American brand of anti-feminine, anti-male feminism. The letter also included an unfortunate phrase regarding men’s right to “pester women.” To some in France, the #MeToo movement seems like little more than a wave of American puritanism, an encore to the McCarthy era witch hunts.

Not surprisingly, the letter exploded on social media where it was condemned as an example of internalized misogyny or, more extremely, rape-apology. Devenue and other signers were largely viewed as out of touch with reality, as glamorous older women whose privilege allows them to forget the fraught workplaces of millenials, or the students who walk home alone at night.

While the writer’s statements do pose a kind of reality check to the #MeToo movement, their statements on men’s so-called right to “pester women” and emphasis on men's role as the seducer, emphasize their experience of an older culture in which male subjectivity was a natural right. While the writers paint a rosy picture of sexual freedom apart from what they see as an American-inspired wave of “puritanism,” the emphasis on female objectivity and passivity, of being pursued, has no point of reference in the worlds of ordinary French women. Sure, women enjoy to flirt and be flirted with (as do men), but to claim a grey line between this and assault smacks of the predatory sexism that sparked the #MeToo movement in the first place. “If that’s your fetish, if that turns you on, there’s a problem," Rania Sendid, a medical student at Sorbonne University told NBC. "She doesn’t speak for me.”

Nevertheless, according to feminist and historian Michelle Perrot, the writers, “are triumphant free women who show a certain lack of solidarity with the #MeToo victims … But they say what they think, and many people share their point of view. The debate is real and must be recognised.” Despite being hailed as outdated or out of touch, the Devenue letter was signed by many millenials. Thus, the divide seems as much ideological as generational.

While the letter was perhaps poorly expressed, it did draw on the fear of many French women that #MeToo represents a brand of moralist, antisexual thinking that is more oppressive than freeing. In some eyes, the movement seems to have morphed from assault victims seeking justice into a culture of revisionism. In an interview with the Atlantic, 55 year old event organizer Jean-Julien Pascalet said that, “we suffered for a long time from religion, which imposed a moral order — saying, 'that’s good, that’s bad.' If we go back to that … it would be terrible, it would be an Orwellian society.” Others object to the trial-via-media occuring in America, saying that disagreements belong in court, not a public blacklist.

In opposition to these points of view are those who recognize that the media blitz of #MeToo was a last resort for women. Due to the statute of limitations, threats, or simply a lack of resources, it is incredibly difficult to even get a rape or sexual harassment case before a court, let alone receive a favorable verdict. Activist Rebecca Amsellem told NBC that the writers of the letter, “don’t represent all women in France,” saying that, “the problem is that the legal system has failed women and has failed victims.” Pauline Verduzier, a French journalist specializing in gender issues, told NBC that, “The statement said if men don’t have the right to be pushy or flirty without asking, without making sure that it’s OK, it’s the end of seduction because seduction is based on men conquering women," she said. "This is not the future; this is the past. This is wrong. Everything in this statement is not for freedom, it’s the opposite.”

The often-overlooked initiator of the public letter, Abnousse Shalmani, is a 41 year old French-Iranian who grew up in Tehran until her parents were forced to immigrate to Paris in the mid 80’s. She is also a rape survivor. In the midst of the uproar over the letter, Shalmani appeared on radio to say that, “we do not dismiss the many women who had the courage to speak up against Weinstein. We do not dismiss either the legitimacy of their fight. We do, however, add our voice, a different voice, to the debate.”

EMMA BRUCE is an undergraduate student studying English and marketing at Emerson College in Boston. She has worked as a volunteer in Guatemala City and is passionate about travel and social justice. She plans to continue traveling wherever life may take her.

Yosemite in Black and White

Michael Fletcher traveled to Yosemite National Park in California for the first time and put together this film. He regrets that he only had 24 hours in the park and had to work quickly to get enough shots for this edit. Regarding his choice to film in black and white, he stated "The skies were blue so the colors weren't amazing. This was part of the reason for me to convert all the imagery into black and white." 

Pride or Prejudice

A look at the countries where LGBTQ+ is not something celebrated

Pride NYC, photo credit: Anna Lopez

June is LGBTQ+ Pride Month. That means parades, celebrations, self-expression, and acknowledgment. At least, in the US that is. While people in the LGBTQ+ community still face struggles every day all over the world, the United States included, it is sometimes easy to forget that there are some places in the world where being a part of the LGBTQ+ community can mean imprisonment, and in some cases, death.

There are an abundance of places that have criminalized same-sex relations around the world. In Liberia, the penalty for same-sex intercourse can be a maximum of one year in prison, and/or a fine of $1,000. In 2012, a direct quote from the Speaker of the House of Representatives named Alex Tyler was “I am a Methodist and traditionalist. I will never support a gay bill because it is damaging to the survival of the country.” And he is not alone in his stance. According to 76crimes.com, there are 74 countries as of April of this year that have laws against people in the LGBTQ+ community. In some cases, such as in Afghanistan, LGBTQ+ people can be put to death for who they are.

Many of the countries that have anti-LGBTQ+ laws are located in the Eastern hemisphere, condensed to many parts of Africa and southern Asia, and there is also a lot of discrimination in the Middle East. A well-known place for discrimination against LGBTQ+ people is Russia. While same-sex intercourse was finally legalized in 1993, and gender identity and expression laws, specifically legal gender change, were finalized in 1997, there are no legal discrimination protections in place. The anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment in Russia is well known around the world, and is periodically brought up in the news and online. Years ago, there was a few images circulating the web of Vladimir Putin with rainbow flags and drag makeup. These images were popular in 2013 after the Russian government prohibited propaganda that showed “non-traditional sexual relationships” being given to children.

It is undeniable that people in the LGBTQ+ community are met with hate and prejudice in the United States despite the strides that have been made here, and those acts of hate and violence should not be forgotten or swept under the rug. However, this Pride Month let us not forget about those who don’t have a voice to go against or speak out against their oppressors. Celebrate those who cannot celebrate themselves due to the unjust and violent laws they may face in their homelands.

ANNA LOPEZ is a rising sophomore at Ithaca college. She is a writing major with aspirations of heading to law school after completing her undergraduate years. She loves animals, art, and travel; she can't wait to see where writing takes her!

Exiting the World Stage: The Implications of US Withdrawal from the UN Human Rights Council

The implications of US Withdrawal from the Human Rights Council

The US has made yet another move against a multilateral approach to global affairs. On Wednesday, June 20th, Nikki Haley US Ambassador to the UN announced the withdrawal of the US from the Human Rights Council (HRC) due to its inefficiency and bias. This decision has severe symbolic and practical effects.

Haley claims that the Trump administration had been considering this move since 2016 but has worked for the past 17 months towards institutional reform, demanding essential changes intended to mitigate the protection of abuse and political bias. However, such demands were not
met and other likeminded countries on the council were unwilling to take a stand against the HRC.

The Trump administration argues that US withdrawal is not a threat to human rights, rather it’s an attempt to strengthen the promotion and protection of human rights around the world. Critics of this decision argue that while the HRC is flawed, withdrawing from it is not an effective solution. Rosa Freedman, professor at the University of Reading, claims that reform was bound to fail as the US tried passing resolutions without any cosponsors or support from other member states. Mohammed Cherkaoui, professor at George Mason University, suggests that the US had been looking for an excuse to withdraw. Haley condemned the lack of action taken regarding Venezuelan human rights abuses, yet the US never called for a special session on Venezuela even when they had the chance.

In 2017, the HRC membership election sparked controversy. Member states, including the US, condemned the election of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) to the council. Despite great opposition, the election of African states to the council is not competitive, so a spot for the
DRC was practically guaranteed. The inclusion of states which are known for violating human rights on the council causes concern among many members of the HRC, and the US declared this primary reason for leaving the council. Another such reason is the council’s stance toward Israel, that the Trump administration perceives as a negative bias. Still, the US withdrawing from the HRC does not undermine the power of the institution. Since Trump’s election, the US has gradually backed out of agreements and decreased funding, signaling to the world that its withdrawal was imminent. During that time, other countries have picked up the slack to ensure
that the withdrawal of the US would have minimal negative effects on the institution as a whole.
However, without the US on the council it will be more difficult to hold countries like Russia, North Korea, and Syria accountable for human rights abuses.

On the surface, the ideas behind US withdrawal seem to be in favor of human rights. However, the US no longer has an official, binding declaration promising to protect human rights or enforcement mechanisms to hold it accountable on the world stage. The symbolic implications are bleak.

No institution is perfect; a multilateral push for reform is necessary for improving the system. In 2020, the HRC is due for organized institutional reform. Now that the US is no longer a member, they have no say in the changes that will take place in the next couple of years.

SARAH MILLER is a senior at Temple University studying Political Science. With a passion for social activism, she hopes to improve the political nature of communities and governments around the world. She believes it is our duty as human beings to use our voices to create positive change.

The Essence of Chile

This video features three amazing places to enjoy the Chilean essence. Shots of the Atacama desert, Torres del Paine National Park, and Easter Island are presented in the footage. The Atacama is the driest desert in the world, Torres del Paine is the best of the Chilean Patagonia,  and Easter Island is the only place where you can find a moai (monolithic human figures carved by the Rapa Nui). 

Unraveling the Fashion Industry

The fashion industry’s unsustainable practices are increasingly under scrutiny.

A snapshot of the 26 billion pounds of textile waste (source: Planet Aid).

The environmental impact of the fashion industry has become a matter of Parliamentary concern in the United Kingdom. The Commons Environmental Audit Committee is launching an investigation into the fashion industry to assess just how unsustainable it is and how the industry might become more sustainable for the future. The inquiry reflects growing concern over the fashion industry’s fast fashion phenomenon that rapidly mass produces clothes for consumption.

Fast fashion is a recent phenomenon that is part of the evolution of the fashion industry. Traditionally clothing was a household endeavor. Changes began with advancements of the Industrial Revolution that introduced ready-made clothing, or clothes sold in a variety of sizes. Yet the changes were selective and mostly reserved for the middle-class individuals who could afford it. Changes continued to occur throughout the 20th century, but it was not till World War II that standardized clothing was widely accepted.  However, the signal for today’s fashion driven world was the 1960s: when the younger generation embraced cheaply made clothes.

Companies responded to increased demand by outsourcing labor to developing countries—much as it is done today. The low quality, high quantity mentality of today’s fashion industry can be seen as a natural development of shifts over the years to more affordable clothing. 

The drive for affordability has led to certain practices that many question for the waste
produced. Instead of the traditional two seasons—Spring/ Summer and Fall/Winter—in
which designers launched the next fashion trend, there are now about 52 micro-seasons in which new fashion is constantly being churned out. Further, popular retailers are often receiving weekly  shipments of new clothing. What this does is make the consumer feel like they are always out-of-date and compel them to keep buying clothing so they can keep up with current trends. Another factor that encourages waste is that most clothes today are made out of lower quality fabrics. Plus, retailers may even disguise such lower quality clothes with “discounts” to convey an illusion of high quality goods. These practices, focused on getting the consumer to consume, only create more waste.

Eco-fashion activist Livia Firth is known for saying in 2015 that “Disposable clothes…stay in a woman’s closet for an average of just five weeks, before being thrown out.”

Indeed, a 2016 survey concluded that the average American throws away around 82 pounds of clothing a year: 26 billion pounds of textiles. Of that 26 billion pounds, according to the nonprofit Council for Textile Recycling, only 15% is donated and 85%, or about 70 pounds per person, ends up in the landfills. This waste is a result of a cycle of “careless production and endless consumption” as stated in the 2015 True Cost documentary.

And it’s not just the landfills that are feeling fast fashion’s impact—fast fashion is criticized for its water pollution, use of toxic chemicals, and its treatment of workers. The Parliament’s inquiry into the UK fashion industry will provide a necessary glimpse into how the global fashion industry might be able to change for the better. But is also a responsibility of individuals to be conscious consumers of what they wear.

TERESA NOWALK is a student at the University of Virginia studying anthropology and history. In her free time she loves traveling, volunteering in the Charlottesville community, and listening to other people’s stories. She does not know where her studies will take her, but is certain writing will be a part of whatever the future has in store.