April 20, 2017 by IdealisticRebel

Women don’t need Protection from Trans Women in bathrooms — they need protection from their Partners

Protecting Women Starts at Home—Not in Public Bathrooms

April 19, 2017 by Cindy Elmore

With North Carolina’s HB2 “bathroom bill” now behind us, it’s worth remembering that the state’s House Speaker and other male members of the legislature routinely promoted the law as a way of “protecting” North Carolina women like me and my teenage daughter. The truth is that it didn’t—and legislation like it never will.

Among other things, HB2 required transgender people to use restrooms corresponding to the sex on their birth certificates in many public buildings—effectively banning trans women, who already face disproportionate risks to their lives and dignity in public and especially in public restrooms, from using women’s rooms. The Associated Press tallied billions of dollars lost by the state from pulled and cancelled conventions, sporting events, concerts and business expansions in protest of the law, which was rescinded in part early this month after more than a year on the books, but HB2 supporters—and those supporting yet a new bathroom bill, HB562—believed their law would heroically save my daughter and me from a bad guy in the stall next door.

There’s no evidence this much-professed threat really existed. But what did happen in North Carolina in the year of HB2? Mary Stoll of Jacksonville was allegedly beaten to death by her boyfriend. Sheryl Dianne Marshall of Raeford was allegedly shot to death by her husband. Rebecca Ann Jones of Wilmington, was allegedly strangled to death by her estranged fiancé. Elizabeth Contrivo of Candler was allegedly shot to death by her husband. Lacey West of Cherryville was allegedly shot to death by her boyfriend. Iris Armstrong of Fort Bragg was allegedly stabbed and beaten to death by her husband. Charlene Ellen Norris of Charlotte was allegedly shot to death by her husband. Garlette Rosette Howard of Greenville was allegedly beaten to death with what was believed to be a hammer by her boyfriend—who also allegedly did the same to Howard’s 11-year-old daughter, Bryana Nicole Carr.

These were just a few of the more than 40 women and children whom the North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence catalogued as having been shot, beaten, strangled, stabbed or run over allegedly by a husband, boyfriend, fiancé, father or stepfather during the year that North Carolina legislators began “protecting” women and children from transgender people (or from the many fakers whom we were told would materialize) in our public bathrooms. They ranged in age from just 2 up to 84.

In the future, North Carolina lawmakers should stop pretending their goal is to “protect women” when they attack other women with legislation like HB2—and do nothing to address the real threats in women’s lives. They should stop saying they’re “protecting” my daughter or me or any other women in North Carolina from imagined, made-up threats when, by far, most of us really aren’t afraid of the trans woman in the stall next to us—whom I promise wants privacy just as much as I do and who would suffer more from being banned from her rightful restroom. They should stop patronizingly pretending that legislating who gets to use which bathroom will “protect” women and children from while dozens and dozens of them will die not at the hands of a stranger in the next stall but at the hands of the men they share dates and homes and often some sort of love with.

Before lawmakers act in the name of North Carolina women again, they might think about conducting a reliable, random, anonymous survey that asks women how often they worry about the “threat” that HB2 allegedly addressed. Then they should ask how many of us have been afraid of a man who supposedly cared for us. And they should think about Mary, Sheryl, Rebecca, Elizabeth, Lacey, Iris, Charlene, Garlette and Bryana when asking that question. Then, perhaps, they can act in our name.

To some this post might seem lightweight, however, it is not. To the transgender men and women it is serious and represents a basic human right. From my point of view, how does one check? How do the conservatives plan on enforcing this law? No public official that I contacted last year had a clear direct answer. Of course not. They would have to do a physical examination on every man and/or women who walked into a public restroom.

The bill passed this year by our new Democratic governor, is a compromise bill and it does not completely erase the HB bill or as we call it the bathroom bill. There are a lot of good, honest, hard-working people who are still being discriminated against or face the prospect of future discrimination.

While this legislative issue is not my only concern for men and women and it is very important, there is another issue near and dear to my heart. It is of Domestic Violence. Yes DV. The crime that didn’t used to be a crime. It used to be a right of a husband. He could hit a woman with anything as long as it was no thicker than his thumb. Check out the male thumbs around you.

That is all changed in 2017. It took a lot of hart work by concerned women, community leaders, religious institutions, and feminists to work together to say, NO. No you can’t beat a woman

If you care about women, then pitch in and speak up for transgender women and abused women. If you really care, when a bill is proposed, read it carefully and vote your compassion heart. A woman is beaten, in America, every 11 seconds. Every 11 seconds a woman or girl feels a hand, fist, slap, push, kick, pinch, twist on their bodies. This is not love. This has never been love and it never will be love.

Legislation is being proposed to cut funding for DV programs across the country. Please vote against cuts. Woman’s and girl’s lives are at stake. If Bathroom bills are brought up for vote in your state or country, please vote against them. These people can not hurt you. They will not hurt you. However transgender women are beaten and/or killed simply because they exist. Let’s us stop all violence against women everywhere.

Namaste

Barbara

April 17, 2017 by IdealisticRebel

Women’s Equality in Literal Motion

First Woman to Run in Boston Marathon Did It Again — 50 Years Later

A Boston Marathon official tried to hustle Kathrine Switzer, No. 261, off the course during the race in 1967. PAUL CONNELL / THE BOSTON GLOBE, VIA GETTY IMAGES

By VICTOR MATHER

APRIL 17, 2017

Fifty years ago, a runner officially entered as K.V. Switzer participated in the Boston Marathon. On Monday, she did it again at age 70.

Kathrine Switzer’s marathon in 1967 became historic because she was the first woman to complete the all-male race as an official entrant — her registration as “K.V. Switzer” hid her gender. The race resonated far beyond a footnote in the record books when an official tried to force her from the course after a few miles.

“The marathon was a man’s race in those days; women were considered too fragile to run it,” she wrote in an essay for The New York Times 10 years ago. “But I had trained hard and was confident of my strength. Still, it took a body block from my boyfriend to knock the official off the course.” Switzer recovered to finish in 4 hours 20 minutes.

Switzer completed this year’s race only a little slower, in 4:44:31.

Women were finally officially allowed to enter the Boston Marathon in 1972.

Women’s marathoning has come a long way, joining the Olympics in 1984 and gaining popularity through runners like Grete Waitz and Tegla Loroupe. More than half of marathon runners in the United States are women.

“In 1967, few would have believed that marathon running would someday attract millions of women, become a glamour event in the Olympics and on the streets of major cities, help transform views of women’s physical ability and help redefine their economic roles in traditional cultures,” Switzer wrote.

Over the years, Switzer has competed in more than 30 marathons, winning New York in 1974 in 3:07:29, and has worked as a television commentator. She is the founder of 261 Fearless, a running club for women. The name comes from the number she wore in 1967.

Switzer started this year’s marathon on Monday morning wearing the same number. It will be retired after the race. Before her start, she was given the honor of firing the gun for the women’s elite runners.

She has said she hopes to run New York this year as well.

Of her legacy as a pioneer, she wrote in The Times: “We learned that women are not deficient in endurance and stamina, and that running requires no fancy facilities or equipment. Women’s marathoning has created a global legacy.”

Correction: April 17, 2017

An earlier version of this article referred incorrectly to one of Switzer’s split times. She ran 10 kilometers, not 5, in 1:05:06.

March 30, 2017 by IdealisticRebel

Why It Matters that Pence won’t have dinner with a woman not his wife

Why It Matters That Pence Won’t Have Dinner With A Woman Who Isn’t His Wife

In Pence’s worldview, men have no self-control, and women are either temptresses or guardians of virtue.

By Emma Gray

A recent Washington Post profile of Second Lady Karen Pence, wife of Vice President Mike Pence, uncovered an interesting detail about their extremely close relationship. Pence reportedly told The Hill in 2002 that “he never eats alone with a woman other than his wife and that he won’t attend events featuring alcohol without her by his side.”

This tidbit caused a small uproar on Twitter, with some praising Pence for respecting his wife and his marriage…

…and others pointing out that, perhaps there are reasons outside of a sexually or emotionally untoward encounter to go out to dinner with someone. Maybe you have a friend who isn’t the same gender as you! Or maybe you work with people of different genders, and you sometimes attend professional dinners with them!

The way Mike Pence and his wife mutually define a respectful marriage is up to them. But there are two reasons that this revelation about the Pences’ relationship set off such a firestorm online. First, the religious guidelines that govern what “respect” means to the Pences are part of a system that works to prop up male power and keep women subordinate. And second, VP Pence is not just a man with a wife, he’s the second most powerful person governing the nation ― which means that the way he views women in his personal life could have bearing on the way he sees American women writ large.

The no-eating-with-another-woman rule was first made popular by evangelical pastor Billy Graham in 1948, as part of the “Modesto Manifesto.” According to the Christian History Institute:

The most famous provision of the manifesto called for each man on the Graham team never to be alone with a woman other than his wife. Graham, from that day forward, pledged not to eat, travel, or meet with a woman other than Ruth unless other people were present. This pledge guaranteed Graham’s sexual probity and enabled him to dodge accusations that have waylaid evangelists before and since.

The provision, which came to be known as The Billy Graham Rule, allowed Graham to use his dashing looks to his advantage without cultivating an over-sexualized persona that other evangelicals might not have taken kindly to. (There are some Muslims who adhere to a similar only-dine-with-wives-and-relatives guideline, though one can assume such a disclosure would not elicit such a strong defense from the right.)

American evangelist Billy Graham and his wife Ruth. New York, New York, May 18, 1966.

This history makes it all-the-more clear that this do-not-dine-with-women rule is predicated on the idea that the company of women is always first and foremost about sex.

There is nothing disrespectful about a committed person having a meal with a friend or colleague who is not the same gender as they are ― unless one is to assume that any interaction not under the watchful eye of a spouse would inevitably lead to infidelity. In this worldview, men have no self-control, and women are either temptresses or guardians of virtue.

The underpinnings of this belief system are what allow men to view women as “other” rather than equal. They allow some to rationalize that female victims of sexual violence “asked for it” because they wore “provocative” clothing, and others (including our president) to believe that assault is a natural outcome of putting men and women together in a high-pressure environment like the military. These belief systems are what create male-dominated work environments where women are viewed as sexualized distractions or cut out of the office culture altogether.

Is the Vice President of the United States able to see any woman as his contemporary, rather than a potential threat to his marriage?

The ability to refuse to be alone with someone who is not the same gender as you and still climb the professional ladder is a privilege that is simply not afforded to women. Imagine if Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris or Nancy Pelosi refused to attend political functions where alcohol was served without their husbands in tow to supervise them. Imagine if they never took one-on-one meetings with potential campaign managers or fellow lawmakers who happened to be men. These women’s careers would have been over before they started.

To be a successful woman in an industry where men still make up the majority of power brokers means working with men. It means fighting for a spot at the table, and accepting that, sometimes, you may be the only woman there.

Perhaps VP Pence has made exceptions to his 2002 marital rule in the intervening years. But as Mother Jones Editor-in-Chief Clara Jeffery pointed out on Twitter, following this rule to its logical conclusion would mean that Pence’s ability to meet with and work with women would be severely limited.

Can he have a professional lunch with Kellyanne Conway or Nikki Haley or Ivanka Trump without viewing it as a marital betrayal? Is he open to hiring women into positions of power on his staff ― specifically positions that require consistent contact? Is the Vice President of the United States able to see any woman as his contemporary, rather than a potential threat to his marriage?

I don’t doubt that Pence has a deep regard for his wife. What is worrisome is the idea that the principles that govern his marriage could be used to govern the country.

March 27, 2017 by IdealisticRebel

Trump’s ‘Alternative Facts’ Hurt Women

TRUMP’S ‘ALTERNATIVE FACTS’ HURT WOMEN EVERYWHERE

BY SARAH O’HAGAN

From Vietnam through Watergate and Exxon Valdez, and in my first newsroom jobs after college, reporters were roundly regarded as truth-tellers, and the power of journalism was considered incontrovertible.

Today huge swaths of the country distrust the media. From the bully pulpit, the president brushes aside stories he disagrees with as “fake news,” and recently called the media “enemy number one.” Truth has become subjective, and a top White House spokeswoman, in coining the term “alternative facts,” is telling the country that it’s all right to repackage reality to serve a political narrative.

Yet just as we did when Walter Cronkite covered Vietnam, drawing on dispatches from embedded reporters, we need great journalism to explain the world to us and to hold our government accountable to its citizens.

The need for independent, investigative news is especially clear when it comes to the issues that matter most to women. “Women’s issues” have been championed for decades by both political parties, but more often than not used as a wedge to divide citizens, not unite them. The fact is, there’s much more consensus on issues affecting women—and the need for continued action—than politicians would have you believe. When it comes to women’s rights, more than 80 percent of women and men say it’s important for the Trump administration and Congress to advance gender equality, according to a poll recently released by nonpartisan firm PerryUndem.

People gather for the Women’s March in Washington

Family planning is often described as controversial, however, that same poll revealed that 85 percent of voters want to ensure women have access to quality, affordable birth control; 67 percent oppose nominating a Supreme Court justice based on their belief in restricting or eliminating women’s right to an abortion; and 71 percent oppose taking away funds from Planned Parenthood that are used for birth control, well-woman care and cancer screenings for low-income women.

Surprised? We have grown so accustomed to the narrative that we are a divided nation, we don’t realize that actually, when it comes to women’s rights, we’re almost entirely united in supporting them.

Even among those who voted for Trump, the majority do not fully support the agenda he aggressively advances on these issues. Actually, the gulf between what women in America want—and the mandate the new administration takes on their behalf—is glaringly wide.

We know that women hold a lot less power in the U.S.: they make up less than 13 percent of police officers nationwide; they publish fewer than 20 percent of newspaper op-eds; they hold just about one in five political seats around the country, and they are much more likely to be poor, and raising children alone.

Yet there is a competing narrative brewing among some women in America who reject these facts. This narrative hinges on personal experience, and perhaps a culture of personal resilience and independence. While millions of women marched on January 21, others called them out on social media as privileged, silly or feeling sorry for themselves.

But personal experience is not a wide enough lens to understand discrimination in America. For that, we have to examine the facts. And the facts are that countries with strong support for women’s rights also have more prosperous economies, stronger national security, less corruption, less poverty and lower spending on defense.

We need journalists to report on these facts, and in particular, we need journalists focused on women’s issues.

The power of media to speak truth to power is as strong as it has ever been. I remember when a single photo printed in the Washington Post turned the tide of public opinion against President Nixon. It was of Rose Mary Woods, Nixon’s secretary, demonstrating how she had accidentally erased 18 minutes on Nixon’s private taping system. She was pictured extended sideways in her chair, one heeled foot reaching for the machine pedal below her desk and one arm flung overhead to the telephone button she claimed to have pressed in error. It was plain to this then 11 year-old that the contorted “Rose Mary stretch” was a whopper.

Truth is often uncomfortable—but there’s no viable alternative. And just as we did in the ’70s, we still rely on journalists to discover and report it.

Sarah O’Hagan is the board chair of the Fuller Project for International Reporting, an independent media organization that reports the news that matters most to women, around the world and in the U.S.

It is important to stay aware of issues that effect women in this political climate. Why? Women are one half of the worlds population. The other half may not approve of all the time. They want to control us, what we think and our bodies. To take care of ourselves and our daughters, sisters and granddaughters we need to be alert for what is happening that will negatively impact women and women’s lives.

Namaste

Barbara

November 25, 2016 by IdealisticRebel

Muslims at the Pentagon Brace for Trump Administration

The uncertainty that settled upon many of the citizens in America since the election has not bypassed a lot of these federal workers. This is what they are fearing.

‘ANTICIPATORY FREAKOUT’

Muslims at the Pentagon Brace for Trump Administration

For Muslims inside the national-security apparatus whom the Obama administration welcomed with open arms, fear of Trump is already pervasive, U.S. officials tell The Daily Beast.

NANCY A. YOUSSEF

11.22.16 1:13 AM ET

Donald Trump’s inauguration may be 58 days away, but for the Muslim officials once welcomed into the U.S. government’s war on terrorism, the change already has begun.

Four U.S. officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said fear is pervasive among Muslims inside the halls of the Pentagon, the CIA, and the Department of Homeland Security in anticipation of a Trump administration. Already, the officials said, they are seeing colleagues who are less willing to share their thoughts about national security. They fear they will no longer be seen as an asset to confronting terrorism but rather suspect members of the government they serve.

It is, one U.S. official explained, a climate of “anticipatory freakout.”

Muslim employees at the Pentagon, both civilian and military, were reticent to talk about their fears, even in a building where there are Muslim services every Friday.

“I am scared to speak,” one civilian told The Daily Beast. “We don’t know what it is going to mean for us.”

Will Muslim CIA agents be asked to register? Will the next commander in chief ban the family of Muslim troops from visiting this country? Will Muslim members of the Department of Homeland Security face increased scrutiny based on their faith?

“It’s one thing to attack your argument. It’s another to attack your person. And that is what people fear: that if they speak up too much, they will be attacked,” the U.S. official continued.

“You are less likely to speak up if you are against the prevailing view. Before, that was not a consideration.”

Managers throughout the departments already are trying to calm staffers, reassuring them they will not be treated differently by those around them.

It is not just Muslims who are worried. Gays and lesbians, African Americans, Hispanics, and women all have expressed some level of concern. After all, the national-security community has historically lagged behind other government agencies when it comes to embracing diversity.

It was not until a 1995 executive order that gays and lesbians could serve openly in national-security jobs and get clearances. At the same time, women climbed the ranks of the agencies, most notably in 1997, when Madeleine Albright became the first female secretary of State, the highest national-security position ever held by a woman. Post-9/11, two presidents publicly spoke on behalf of Muslims and said they are a part of the American fabric, not a segment of the population that should be equated with extremists.

According to the White House, minorities now make up 20 percent of senior diplomats and 15 percent of senior military officers and intelligence officials.

Despite that, the fear these days among Muslims especially is born out of both the rhetoric of the election and, more recently, Trump’s picks so far for his national-security team. Ret. Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the incoming national security adviser, has called fear of Muslims “rational.” On Sunday, Reince Priebus said on Meet the Press that while there was no plan for a Muslim registry, “I’m not going to rule out anything.”

Also Sunday, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach met with Trump and was photographed carrying a document spelling out a 100-day plan for the Department of Homeland Security that included a proposal to question “high-risk” immigrants over support for Sharia law and belief in the U.S. Constitution.

Perhaps the most searing interaction between Muslims and Trump, for Muslims who serve in national security, was Trump’s treatment of a Muslim Gold Star family during the presidential campaign. After Khizr Khan—whose son, Capt. Humayun Khan, was killed in Iraq in 2004—spoke at the Democratic National Convention, Trump attacked him and his wife, and insisted that he too had “made a lot of sacrifices.”

The result is a president-elect not welcome in the nation’s mosques.

For some, there already is a litmus test for incoming members of the Trump administration: Will agency heads and Cabinet secretaries let the mistreatment of Muslims or any other minority be tolerated? Some said they hope Congress poses such questions to Flynn during the confirmation hearings.

Either way, the new administration is a marked change. For the Obama administration, diversity within the administration was not just about politics but a means to better secure the country. And officials advocated it aggressively. Departments now are filled with younger staffers, many of whom never anticipated anything other than a government that embraced diversity.

Where minority staffers once were in lower-level jobs, now it is no longer uncommon to see a Muslim in hijab at the table of a high-level meeting.

“I truly believe that the business case for diversity is stronger for CIA than it is for any organization in the U.S. government,” CIA Director John Brennan told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in June. “Diversity not only gives us the cultural understanding we need to operate in any corner of the globe, it also helps us avoid groupthink, ensuring we bring to bear a range of perspectives on the complex challenges that are inherent to intelligence work.”

Just last month, President Obama issued a memorandum about “Promoting Diversity and Inclusion in the National-Security Workforce” that called for better data about the makeup of national-security employees and to help expand diversity within the national-security community.

There is nothing that binds the incoming president from adhering to any part of the memorandum.

November 18, 2016 by IdealisticRebel

More Trump Backlash: Students tell black kids to get to the back of the bus

Dozens of Missouri high school students Wednesday walked out of class to protest racially charged incidents and what students say is a lack of appropriate response from the school administration.According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, at least 150 students assembled outside Ladue Horton Watkins High School and marched towards the district’s administrative offices, demanding speak with the superintendent.

The protest stemmed from an incident Thursday when a group of students on a school bus chanted “Trump” while two white students told their black peers to sit in the back of the bus. Those two students were disciplined.

Tuesday, parents, teachers, students and alumni gathered at the school board meeting to express their disgust over last week’s incidents.

“I’m outraged, I’m saddened, I’m disgusted,” alumni Melanie Hancock told Fox 2 Now.
Tango Walker Jackson, whose 15-year-old daughter was on the bus, said Thursday’s event was “not an isolated incident.”

“This is the fifth racially charged incident with my daughter since the beginning of the school year,” Walker Jackson told the meeting.

Walker Jackson’s daughter, Ladue Horton Watkins High sophomore Tajah Walker, also spoke at the meeting, telling the school board she will not tolerate this type of behavior.

“It’s hard to go through things like this,” Walker said. “I’m a very outspoken person and I will not be mistreated and I will not let my friends or anybody else be mistreated – white, black, anybody.”

Some parents were outraged that the two white students were already back in school, arguing the administration should further investigate what led to Thursday’s display.

“You imagine having to keep your cellphone on you constantly because you don’t know what’s going to happen to your child?” Walker Jackson asked Tuesday night. “Fix it.”

The district said it’s working on several tolerance initiatives, including diversity and equity training for staff. But Ladue Horton Watkins High principal acknowledged, “there is continued work to be done and we do know challenges lie ahead but now is our opportunity to bridge these issues.”

At the walkout Wednesday, Walker said the racially charged incidents required more of a response from the administration.

“We’ll come back to school when they treat us right,” Walker told the Dispatch. “If they suspend me, they better suspend everybody.”

Watch the news report video here

November 10, 2016 by IdealisticRebel

ACLU Declares War On Trump

November 9, 2016

NEW YORK — In response to Donald Trump’s election as president of the United States, Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, had the following statement:

“For nearly 100 years, the American Civil Liberties Union has been the nation’s premier defender of freedom and justice for all, no matter who is president. Our role is no different today.

“President-elect Trump, as you assume the nation’s highest office, we urge you to reconsider and change course on certain campaign promises you have made. These include your plan to amass a deportation force to remove 11 million undocumented immigrants; ban the entry of Muslims into our country and aggressively surveil them; punish women for accessing abortion; reauthorize waterboarding and other forms of torture; and change our nation’s libel laws and restrict freedom of expression.

“These proposals are not simply un-American and wrong-headed, they are unlawful and unconstitutional. They violate the First, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments. If you do not reverse course and instead endeavor to make these campaign promises a reality, you will have to contend with the full firepower of the ACLU at every step. Our staff of litigators and activists in every state, thousands of volunteers, and millions of card-carrying supporters are ready to fight against any encroachment on our cherished freedoms and rights. diversity-and-inclusion

embrace-diversity

Diversity and inclusion

“One thing is certain: we will be eternally vigilant every single day of your presidency and when you leave the Oval Office, we will do the same with your successor.

The ACLU released its analysis of candidate Trump’s policy proposals in July, which can be found at: https://www.aclu.org/feature/donald-trump-one-man-constitutional-crisis

ACLU

October 19, 2015 by IdealisticRebel

The Gender Wage Gap Continues

October-07-15

Study Finds US Gender Wage Gap Persists

Data compiled by the US Census Bureau this week once again demonstrates a gender wage gap, showing that American women who work full-time, year-round jobs on average earn 79 cents for every dollar paid to men. This loss in wages amounts to an average of $10,762 annually for white women, and is significantly greater for women of color.

The data, analyzed by the National Partnership for Women and Families, reveals women with full-time, year-round employment receive far less than their male counterparts, earning roughly $39,621 yearly compared to men whose wages exceed $50,000. The pay disparity is even greater for women of color. Overall, African American women earn just 60 cents on the dollar and Latinas a mere 55 cents.

The need to close the gender wage gap could not be more critical. Not only do women comprise nearly half of the paid work force in the US, but they also head more than 15.2 million households, 4,658,047 of which fall below the poverty line. With the additional $10,762 annually in found wages, women breadwinners would earn enough money for approximately 83 more weeks of food, over a year’s worth of rent and an extra 4,635 gallons of gas.

That gap is even starker for women of color. Full-time working African American women earn an average 60 cents for every dollar paid to a white man, and Latinas earn a startling 55 cents. These gaps amount to losses of tens of thousands of dollars for women each year.

“This study confirms that a punishing wage gap persists for women in every corner of the country and the costs for women, their families and our national and state economies are significant,” said Debra L. Ness, president of the National Partnership for Women and Families. “America’s women and families- and our nation- cannot afford to wait any longer for the fair and family friendly measures that would help.”

Media Resources: Media Resources: US Census Bureau 9/16/15; National Partnership Data; National Partnership Press Release 9/16/15; Feminist Newswire 9/1/15

bjwordpressdivider