Category: Life & Love

Coming out as a fully fledged adult can feel like staring at yourself in a funhouse mirror: Am I looking at the same me I was looking at before? Have I been wrong this whole time? Am I faking it? Or, as the chef and food writer Molly Wizenberg says in her new memoir, The Fixed Stars, you may find yourself plagued by the Sisyphean frustration of someone banging her head against the wall: “Who am I? Who am I? Who am I?”

For Wizenberg, this string of questions came in her late 30s, when she was married with a small child, running two businesses with her husband, and overtaken by a crush that began, of all places, at jury duty. That crush was the first crack in the foundation of her life; the questions were the force that pulled it apart. The Fixed Stars is her effort to survey the new landscape and how she arrived there with a fine toothed comb.

The first seeds of the book came as a blog post on Wizenberg’s beloved food blog Orangette. (It’s named for those little chocolate-dipped candied orange peels.) She started the site in 2004 after abandoning a PhD in anthropology in hopes of becoming a food writer, or maybe even just a food writer’s assistant. The site took off quickly, due to Wizenberg’s homespun vibe and the deep, wide-eyed pleasure she took in small things, many of which happened in her kitchen. (“Satisfaction is a fine roasted chicken and a slab of ridiculously rich chocolate cake, honey,” she wrote in an early blog post from 2004.) A book deal came out of it, and a new relationship—her now ex-husband, Brandon Pettit, first emailed her because a friend had passed on Orangette as something he might like.

By 2016, the blog had slowed, as so many have since their early-2000s boom. But in late November, after nearly two months of radio silence, Wizenberg resurfaced and published a lengthy blog post coming out. The post reads like a clear-headed account of a hurricane written from its roving eye. “I’m learning who I am, and I can’t stop,” Wizenberg wrote. She said she and Pettit had separated; he had moved out, and they were coparenting; she no longer identified as straight, but didn’t have a tidy category for herself yet.

“I felt this incredible pressure because it felt like I was hiding, and the post felt like relieving that pressure,” Wizenberg told ELLE.com of the blog post, which now has over 500 comments. At the time, she was in her second queer relationship, with the person she’s now married to, Ash Wizenberg-Choi. “I couldn’t stand the thought of being out somewhere with Ash, and being affectionate, and having someone who knew me only through my writing see me and think that I had been deceitful. Not towards my husband so much, but that I was deceiving the reader somehow.” This dogged desire for self-knowledge and resolution animates The Fixed Stars, as well as an almost self-flagellating fixation on the question of whether or not she had just been closeted, whether something in her shifted, or whether she was queer all along.

“In the early months after going to jury duty, I felt so much shame and bewilderment,” said Wizenberg. “Like, how could I have not known this part of myself? I’ve spent years writing about my life in ways that I felt were very honest. I felt [like] I must have somehow been lying to myself all along.” The crush and the shame it produced festered in tandem until Wizenberg finally addressed them: first by telling Pettit, then by trying an open relationship until it became painfully obvious that it wasn’t the right solution.

The Fixed Stars is as much a queer coming-of-middle-age story as it is a loving, honest portrait of a dissolving marriage. Frustration is a central theme,providing a foil for Wizenberg’s introspection. But as the book progresses, that tension slackens, and opens up to a kinder, more nuanced self-assessment. “I felt very consumed with getting to the bottom of this,” she writes about the question of her sexuality. “And as I wrote more and more, it occurred to me what I really wanted was to do some thinking about, what do we mean when we talk about the self? I found myself wanting to go beyond the questions that I originally started out with, about sexuality, and what it means to be a good woman. I wanted to ask, what does it mean to have a self that bumps up against other people’s selves, and that moves through the world and is altered by it?” Throughout the book, Wizenberg comes off as an eager student both of queerness and of herself.

As an adult, realizing you might be gay, even just a little bit gay, when you had long seen yourself otherwise often turns into a second puberty, one that is more intellectual than physical. (It happened to me around age 28; depending on who you ask and how you define “coming out,” this can often feel more like entering purgatory than a dawning revelation.) There is ample evidence that sexuality is fluid and can shift throughout one’s lifetime, a fact that can at times makes Wizenberg’s “was I closeted or was I straight?” line of self-interrogation feel almost beside the point. But the tenacity with which she seeks to chip away at her self gives her quest a necessary backbone.

As the book progresses, Wizenberg eases into the idea that the past, straight version of herself wasn’t wrong or in denial, just the version of who she was at the time. Writing the book, she says, helped her achieve this level of peace. “To go back with a sense of curiosity and live in some of these scenes again, and really start to believe that maybe this was in me all along, but that doesn’t mean that I was closeted, or even that I knew,” she says. “It means that there was the potential for change in me, like there’s the potential for change in all of us for all kinds of things that we don’t get so worked up about.”

She described it like loving boxed mac and cheese as a kid and then finding it revolting as an adult—a fully mundane, widely accepted shift in preference and feeling.

Once Wizenberg begins a relationship with the prosecutor she met on jury duty, named Nora in the book, her questions begin to shift from “Am I gay or not?” to “What would it mean for me to be gay?” Some interesting clues come from Wizenberg’s reflection on her upper-middle-class upbringing in Oklahoma City, and the gay men who surrounded both her mother (an aerobics enthusiast) and her uncle (a gay man who died of AIDS-related pneumonia in 1988).

When Wizenberg had to do an eighth-grade research paper for her science class, she chose the biological basis of sexuality, hoping to prove that queerness was an innate thing, as simple as eye color. “I thought then, and well into adulthood, that each of us has an essential self, and that self is solid, stable, dependable,” she writes. “Sexual orientation was part of my essential self.” And it was part of the essential selves of the gay men she idolized; this was a foundational fact in her admiration of them. Look at these people who are so different than me, she thought, and so beautiful. But the “born this way” reasoning has long existed as a way to justify queerness to straight people rather than examine it from the inside; the farther Wizenberg (and the discourse at large) gets from this kind of essentialism, the more interesting her reflections become.

The Fixed Stars describes a familiar yearning for baby queers of all ages: knowing what you are, but not knowing how to embody it quite yet. “I was euphoric….when I ran into the lesbians at pickup or drop-off,” Wizenberg writes of two different couples at her young daughter’s school. “I wanted them to take me in like a stray.” Her relationship with Nora ultimately unravels because of Nora’s insistence that queerness, and queer sex, should only look one way, but never really explaining what that one way is or being willing to teach it. A friend of hers deems Wizenberg a femme, a categorization she finds ill-fitting—like many queer people, she lands somewhere a bit fuzzier, a little less definable, on the standard butch-femme spectrum. Finding her way to a queer identity as a divorced cis mother who lives in a pretty straight part of town turns out to be a far more dizzying trajectory than she had thought.

Throughout the book, Wizenberg dips into other texts to mark her path. In this practice she both nods to and mimics Maggie Nelson’s The Argonauts, a text that is constantly in conversation with queer theory, braiding itself seamlessly into the category. For Wizenberg, the effect is more like a set of North Stars along the author’s path: references to Garth Greenwell, a writer she adores, and citing Lisa Diamond’s study reflecting the mutability of (cis) women’s sexualities as compared to those of (cis) men. By the end of the book, once Wizenberg has begun her relationship with Ash, she offers up a quote from Ursula K. Le Guin: “When you look at yourself in the mirror, I hope you see yourself. Not one of the myths.” It reads like a deep, relieved sigh.

Perhaps naturally, writing about her current relationship feels like a touchier subject for Wizenberg than writing about ones that have ended. The book’s last chapters discuss Ash’s decision to use they/them pronouns; when we first meet them, Wizenberg uses she/her pronouns for Ash until the two of them have a conversation about it, a stylistic decision that Ash was a part of. “[I was] trying to make sure that I was doing right by them,” Wizenberg says, “representing them the way they want to be represented now, and in a way that is not inaccurate to who they were when we met. And I wanted to use the time and space that I had to give some examples of what it looks like to learn about a partner whose gender is not the same as mine.” At first read, the choice was off-putting—was the narrator misgendering her own partner?—but this is not meant an iron-clad lesson of what queerness or a non-binary identity should look like, it’s a portrait of a set of relationships, something messier and more human.

“What I want for my queer family is conventional,” Wizenberg writes. “I want a partner who is home with me for dinner, who is an equal partner in domesticity and parenting, who goes to bed at the same time I do…we are the ordinary partnership I want.” She goes on to explain that this might not be the queer liberation fought for at Stonewall, that many other queer people whose faces and bank accounts don’t look like hers have it much worse off. The Fixed Stars describes a white, upper-middle class version of a queer awakening—this is Seattle, after all—and its self-awareness is appreciated, but these nods to privilege often feel compulsory when not grappled with more fully.

By the end of the book, Wizenberg has eased up on herself and settled into a sense of self and a relationship that feel easy; this ease comes out in the joy and optimism that fill these last chapters. Introspection and domestic life have long been her chosen themes, and both get swept up in the storm of this book, shaken and transformed, then set back down on solid ground—remade more loosely, more humanely. What’s left isn’t a version of our narrator who is finally safe from crisis forever, but one who’s done the hard work grappling with change, so that the next time dark clouds form on the horizon, she’ll be ready.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

Francisca Concha had other plans for June 27. In a perfect world, she would have enjoyed dinner with family on the deck of a boat cruising through canals in the Netherlands after marrying her partner of three years, Vincent. They would’ve ended the day with friends at a bar toasting their new life as a married couple. But instead, when the day rolled around, Concha, 32, and Vincent, 30, ate cake and champagne for breakfast in their two bedroom apartment while quarantining in the U.K., where they live. “We are known for cracking open a bottle of champagne for no particular reason,” Concha says, “so it seemed like the right thing to do.”

It’s a relationship milestone they’ll never forget. As the coronavirus forced the cancellation of large social gatherings, many couples made adjustments—from Zoom weddings to miniaturized, socially-distanced ceremonies—while others, who delayed their nuptials until next year or beyond, are still looking to honor the original day they thought would be their anniversary date for life. For these couples, instead of firing up Netflix for yet another binge sesh, they are choosing to mark the occasion with Non-Wedding Day events with meaningful nods to the day that could’ve been.

“Sometimes we don’t want to remember things that could be considered traumatic or stressful, but I think people are taking things in stride,” says New York City event planner Sojourner Auguste, founder and creative director of Erganic Design. Many of her clients have honored their original wedding date in some way. She’s heard of a couples workout, and others who encouraged family and friends to mail them marital advice to read on their new wedding date. “I haven’t had any couple who’s been, ‘Oh well’” when their original wedding date nears, she says. “Everyone’s acknowledging it even if they don’t have a larger plan in place.”

As June 27 approached, Concha grew sad and frustrated. As the date approached, she thought about how she should have been fussing over last minute details. “Instead I was spending endless days in sweatpants having Zoom meetings,” she says. They had to do something to turn it around and officially say goodbye to a June 27 wedding date: Concha ordered a cake, adorned with “Happy Non-Wedding!” in white icing, and Vincent picked up the champagne. (They’ve since married on August 22 in a civil ceremony and celebrated with a small group of friends.)

Denise Ginley, 32, also had plans to walk down the aisle on June 27, but in April she and her partner, Steven, 31, made the decision to postpone until June 2021. Suspecting they would be bummed that Saturday, they planned a full weekend of activities to distract themselves, including baking a cake, attending a protest in New York City, going on a picnic, and reading letters from family and friends compiled by Ginley’s maid of honor. “When you’re planning the wedding, there are so many norms, guidelines, rules—things that are just always done a certain way—but there is no handbook on what to do when you postpone your wedding,” Ginley says. “It felt like as long as we were pandemic safe, we could plan whatever kind of day we wanted. So we did.”

While the stuffy traditions of yore are changing, marriage has long been considered the ultimate romantic milestone and a social rite of passage. The ring, the dress, the centerpieces, seating arrangements—everything can take on significance, the date included. And when both the logistical and fairy tale plans fall through, it can be a major letdown. “I tell my friends I went through every stage of grief,” says Coral Zarrillo, 25, who’s April 26 wedding in Vancouver, B.C. was postponed until November. As the virus spread in March, Zarrillo and her partner Madison, 24, had to make a quick decision to push their ceremony. Friends were slated to bake the cake and arrange the flowers and rather than leaving them high and dry, Zarrillo tweaked her request and had a small cake and bouquets delivered to her and Madison’s house; she also scheduled an Instagram Live with their family and friends.

Throughout the hour-long stream, the couple answered the popular 36 questions that lead to love, as well as others from their family and friends, and cut the cake. Going through the motions of what would’ve occurred at their actual wedding helped Zarrillo move on. Though she acknowledges the losses so many have experienced during the pandemic, for Zarrillo, shifting her wedding plans was also a loss. “But just like we honor all types of things that we lose, honoring our lost wedding date, I think it’s healthy to do that.”

Although a worldwide crisis hardly inspires warm feelings, Auguste says by celebrating a non-wedding day, couples can fold the pandemic into the metaphorical memory book of their romance. Rather than glossing over the change of plans, it can be cathartic to accept that they’d rather be hosting a party by planning another, much smaller affair. “It’s not like you’re going to wake up and not say ‘This is the day we were supposed to get married,’” Auguste says. “Acknowledge it in a way that’s positive, otherwise it’s going to feel weird.”

Laura McNichol kept as much of her original wedding plans intact as she could, minus the “I Do’s.” Despite postponing her August 2 wedding to 2021, McNichol, 29, and her partner Vicki, 30, hosted both of their families in their backyard in Durham, England for a buffet, cake, and drinks. (Vicki had just converted their barn into a bar.) While they yet don’t have the marriage license, McNichol says their backyard non-wedding day fulfilled every expectation of what a wedding should be—so much so that she’s looking forward to their real wedding next year more than ever. “Weddings and being married take different forms,” McNichol says. “Even though we’re not legally married, we’re happy we could celebrate with people we loved.”

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

I would kill to have an orgasm, but I refuse to die for one. That’s my daily quarantine mantra. I whisper it when I get a Raya alert. I scream it while giggling wildly with friends. Eventually I text it directly to a film director—the kind who thinks if he slides into my DMs, I’ll slide out of my clothes. Of course, that’s a no-go during quarantine, but I’ll admit, it’s tempting to make an exception—especially when he texts back “You’re funny” instead of “LOL.” Just as Hamilton’s Angelica treasured “a comma after ‘dearest,’ ” modern women know the secret code of attentive lovers is a fully typed contraction.

Still, there’s no way I’m meeting a stranger right now, because (1) we’re still in a pandemic, and (2) as a spike in sex toy sales shows, sisters are doing it for (and to) themselves. If I get sick just because some dude can use words instead of emojis, I’ll die of shame before I die from COVID-19.

“Everyone I know is scared of being on a ventilator because of a one-nightstand,” agrees Serena Kerrigan, 26, the host of Let’s Fucking Date, a show vetting wannabe suitors via Instagram Live. Bumble sponsored one episode and may sponsor future ones in Season 2. Until then, Kerrigan is dating new people virtually (and having a low-key tryst with her neighbor). “One-nightstands are too risky right now. Instead, you get a COVID test, the guy gets COVID test, and you turn it into a one-month stand. It’s very practical. Lots of my friends are having them, too.”

Once called a “mini relationship” by eharmony and “a party for your commitment issues” by my mother, the one-month stand is an arrangement merging casual sex with temporary intimacy. If a one-night stand is, to quote sexologist Shan Boodram, “the microwavable burrito of sex,” then its four-week equivalent is the Blue Apron: convenient, curated, and marked—like all good food—with a clear expiration date.

“I see the one-month stand as an evolution of hookup culture,” says Helen Fisher, PhD, a senior research fellow at the Kinsey Institute and an expert on female sexuality. “Truly random sex is unlikely during a pandemic—you’re not bringing home a stranger from a bar, hopefully. Now there’s a prolonged courtship process happening, because everything starts at a virtual level.” As apps like Bumble report increased activity, video chat has taken the place of a first date…and a second, and a third. “When you’re ready to meet in person—a step that has added weight during the pandemic—it’s more of a done deal,” Fisher says. And because 2020 is a time of profound change, the usual concerns about “moving too fast” or “ending things too soon” don’t really apply. How can our friends or our own inner voices say, “This relationship isn’t normal” when the whole world is stumbling blindly toward a new normal?

But despite a changed world, some truths still hold, like how sleeping with someone doesn’t guarantee true love, even if the hookup lasts 24 days instead of 24 hours. According to stats from an annual national survey from Match.com, on average, 35 percent of respondents who had “friends with benefits” relationships progressed to a long-term relationship. Meanwhile, four weeks is a natural end point for casual sex, Fisher says, “because the dopamine rush we get from arousal often fades over [that] time.”

“That’s exactly what happened to me,” says Stevie,* a 39-year-old event planner from Brooklyn who recently ended her one-month stand with Ana, 32. “Initially, we bonded because of physical attraction, plus we’d both been furloughed. But Ana stayed hyperfocused on her career, and I said, ‘Screw it, I just want to go [mountain] climbing and be outside.’ We were both cool with it ending; it was just time.”

“People are definitely trying to configure new types of connection,” says Jean Yang, PhD, an MIT-educated computer scientist and the founder andCEO of Akita Software, whose quarantine experiment, JeanDate, has paired hundreds of couples by using human pattern recognition (she paired people together based on what she knew of them). “But the four-week mark is often when I hear from the women, ‘This is done; set me up again!’ If there isn’t a really deep connection, it just loses steam.”

A 37-year-old musician named Heather* learned that truth after moving from New York’s SoHo to South Carolina and having a one-month stand soon after. “Normally, my heart can’t take casual sex,” Heather says. “But I can’t even remember what day it is! Right now, a month of intimacy is all I have to give. We stayed friends, because after four weeks, there’s no bitterness. Ironically, I’ve had long-term relationships that were ‘serious,’ but this [one-month stand] was the healthiest I’ve experienced in a while.”

If this were a movie, the one-month stand would turn into a self-aware-but-still-earnest rom-com, the kind with a Lumineers soundtrack and a teary epiphany from Issa Rae. “People assume that for single women, lockdown means we need to lock down a mate, or else we’re just sad,” Kerrigan says. “In reality, it’s the opposite. We’re saving so much time weeding out people who aren’t worth our energy. To be real with you, even after it’s safe to casually hookup or date again, I don’t see the point in going back to such a broken system.”

Honestly, why would we? A one-month stand is a way to tackle the “pleasure learning curve” crucial to women’s sexual fulfillment, test a potential connection in crazy times, and walk away fairly unscathed if things run their course. The concept even dovetails with expert health guidelines—like those released from the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment—that promote seksbuddies (which, yes, are exactly what they sound like). Studies even show that having sex on a regular basis helps raise antibody levels.

Back on my bed, the text messages continue: Come for a walk? asks the film director. A walk to where? I shoot back. The Dance of the Three Dots plays out on my screen as he types a potential response, erases it, types again, and finally hits Send. Let’s walk to the future. Next year? Next month? Maybe it’ll be better there. He has no idea.

*Some names have been changed.

This article appears in the October 2020 issue of ELLE.

GET THE LATEST ISSUE OF ELLE

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

In August, a statue of Sir John A. Macdonald was toppled in Montreal by activists during a rally to defund the city’s police. According to CBC, the act was explained in leaflets that described Canada’s first Prime Minister as “a white supremacist who orchestrated the genocide of Indigenous peoples with the creation of the brutal residential schools system….”

Macdonald’s statue was not the first to be toppled or vandalized in Canada, and it very likely won’t be the last. Even before conversations about systemic racism became more mainstream this year, statues of historical figures were the topic of controversy. Heated discussion has swirled around the need for honesty about the ugly parts of history, questioning whether monuments are truly educational tools, or simply celebratory symbols.

For many people, tributes to divisive Canadians are a reminder of the pain their communities have experienced, traumas that continue to affect many Black, Indigenous and other racialized people. As Kerry Benjoe from Muscowpetung Saulteaux Nation recently wrote for CBC about a Macdonald statue in Regina: “If we as a society are serious about creating a better future it should include all people. Keeping space for controversial figures, especially those who did not build [Saskatchewan], does nothing in terms of relationship building.”

Because unflattering history is often buried, people can be confused (and sometimes defensive) when a previously celebrated figure’s legacy is called into question. Here, the back stories on five Canadians whose statues are—or could soon be—up for debate.

Edward Cornwallis (1713 – 1776), British governor of Nova Scotia

In 1749, soon after arriving at Mi’kma’ki, the founder of the city of Halifax instituted his notorious “scalping proclamations,” offering bounties for the scalps of murdered Mi’kmaq, an Indigenous people in the area. Cornwallis’ proclamation promised a “reward of Thirty Pounds for every male Indian Prisoner above the Age of Sixteen Years brought in alive or a Scalp.”

As such, his statue in Halifax’s Cornwallis Park has become a point of controversy in recent years. In 2018, activist Rebecca Moore told APTN her point of view. “I want people to know that he committed genocide against our people. He ordered, he wanted us wiped out,” she said. “What kind of a man is that and why do we have a statue of him in the park?”

A City Council task force mandated with figuring out what to do with the statue produced a report stating that Cornwallis had expressed his desire to “root… [the Mi’kmaq] out entirely” from the area. It called the scalping proclamation a cruel policy that allowed racist bounty hunters to profit off of violence against Indigenous people.

In 2018, Cornwallis’ statue was removed from the park and placed in storage.

Read this next: What’s Happening in Nova Scotia Right Now?

Egerton Ryerson (1803 – 1882), Chief Superintendent of Schools, Ontario

This Ontario public education advocate has an entire university named after him—Ryerson University in Toronto, which is where his statue stands. He’s credited with setting the groundwork for free compulsory education in Canada, but as Ontario’s chief superintendent of schools from 1842 to 1876, Ryerson also recommended that Indigenous children be put in boarding schools, away from their families, with religious and English language teaching.

His report was used to implement the residential school system, making him one of its key architects. The schools operated between the 1800s and 1996, and more than 150,000 Indigenous children attended—many were subjected to physical, mental and sexual abuse. In 2015, the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission called the practices at the schools acts of “cultural genocide.”

Ryerson’s statue has been vandalized multiple times. Just this past summer, it was covered in pink paint, and decorated with a sign reading “tear down monuments that represent slavery, colonialism and violence.” Ryerson students have also petitioned the university to remove the statue from campus twice, in 2017 and 2020, as part of the student union’s campaign to recognize the university’s colonial ties.

Sir John A. MacDonald (1815 – 1891), Prime Minister

JAM was one of the Fathers of Confederation—who also enacted many racist policies, the implications of which Canada is still grappling with. The vast majority targeted Indigenous people, including the establishment of the residential school system, through which he aimed to assimilate Indigenous children into white Canadian society by forcibly taking them away from their parents, banning them from speaking their mother languages and prohibiting them from practicing their cultural traditions. According to the Globe and Mail, an Indigenous child in a residential school was more likely to die than a Canadian soldier in World War II.

Macdonald and his government also starved Indigenous communities and forced them onto reserves to make way for the Canadian Pacific Railway, denying rations to communities in the area covered by Treaty 6 (now parts of Alberta and Saskatchewan) if they refused to move.

Macdonald’s government welcomed labourers from China to build the CPR across those stolen lands. But as railway construction was finishing up, Canada introduced a hefty duty of $50 (over $2,200 in today’s dollars) for any Chinese immigrant entering the country. The Chinese Head Tax was the first piece of Canadian legislation to exclude immigrants on the basis of ethnic origin. It separated countless families, as male workers were unable to pay for their family’s entrance into the country.

Read this next: Annamie Paul Just Became the First Black Federal Party Leader in Canada

John Deighton (1830 – 1875), early settler and bar owner, Vancouver

Also known as “Gassy Jack,” the founder of Gastown has had a statue in his namesake neighbourhood for over 100 years. Recently, however, Deighton’s past has been revisited with a more critical lens, with his legacy connected to the ongoing struggles of Indigenous women.

According to the 2019 documentary Red Women Rising, Squamish oral tradition recounts that Deighton purchased a 12-year-old girl named Quahail-ya to be his “wife” after her aunt, his first wife, died. She would later run away at age 15. Quahail-ya’s story has been held up as an early example of the violence and disregard Indigenous women still face in Canada.

“This is connected to Gassy Jack because he ran a bar [where his statue now stands] that catered to…the men who violated my women” says the voiceover in the documentary, which was produced by Battered Women’s Support Services in Vancouver. “Gassy Jack himself, married to a First Nations woman, whose name is erased, deleted, forgotten—yet his name is here on land that was never his.”

A petition calling for the Gassy Jack statue to be removed has garnered over 22,000 signatures since June.

Emily Murphy (1886 – 1933), Judge and Writer, Alberta

Murphy is often remembered as a “trailblazer for social justice:” before becoming the first female judge in the British empire, she and four other women dubbed the Famous Five played a pivotal role in the 1929 Persons Case, when white Canadian women were established as legal “persons,” eligible for appointment to the Senate. However, like other members of the Five, Murphy has been criticized for being racist—especially her concerns about immigration and support of eugenics.

Under the pen name “Janey Canuck,” Murphy published the 1922 book The Black Candle, which posited that “aliens of colour” had banded together in Canada to form a conspiracy called “The Ring,” which planned to corrupt the white race with drugs. Her suggested solution was to deport people of colour (in particular, Chinese, Black, Mexican, Greek and Middle Eastern people). Though this didn’t happen, her racist conspiracy led to laws governing narcotics—Canada passed its first anti-cannabis law a year after the publication of The Black Candle, the first western country to do so, 14 years before the United States.

Read this next: Which Federal Party Has the Best Climate Action Plan?

To this day, such laws disproportionately affect Black and Indigenous people, and other people of colour. In the lead-up to the legalization of cannabis, the Toronto Star found that Black people with no criminal convictions were three times more likely to be arrested for possession than white people with similar backgrounds.

Murphy also supported the eugenics movement—most notably the idea that “unfit” members of society shouldn’t procreate. As a judge, Murphy had a huge influence in Alberta and her support of eugenics contributed to the passing of the province’s 1928 Sexual Sterilization Act. The Act organized the nonconsensual sterilization of people who were considered “mentally deficient” and wasn’t repealed until 1972.

A statue of Emily Murphy still stands in Edmonton, and she is also memorialized at the Women are Persons! monument in Ottawa.

In the lead up to the 2016 election, I interviewed three couples who were going their separate ways in the voting booth. In each scenario, she was voting for Hillary Clinton, and he was not—a microcosm of the divide felt across the nation.

Now in 2020, the presidential election has only taken on more weight, occurring smack dab in the middle of a public health and economic crisis. Naturally, that divide has only deepened. In these past four years, there have been countless articles about how to talk to your relatives about politics at the dinner table and musings about whether those with varying political views can build a long-lasting, modern relationship. It’s all made me wonder: Those duos who voted differently, how are they feeling now?

Below, ELLE.com talked to three (different) couples to find out:

Liz, 26 & Tim, 26

In 2016, Tim voted for third party candidate Gary Johnson and Liz voted for Hillary Clinton. This year, they’re both voting for Joe Biden. They’ve been together since January 2014.

Liz:

“I’m registered as a Democrat, and it was pretty clear who I was going to vote for in 2016. Trump is such a polarizing, misogynistic, racist figure, so whether it was Hillary Clinton or someone else, that wasn’t going to change my mind.

I wrote a text message letter to Tim about why he should vote for Hillary. A huge part of it was that Trump was not the person to lead our country. He had shown that in the way that he was campaigning and the way that he was talking about other candidates. I felt that a vote for a third party candidate would be a vote for Trump. I remember Tim wouldn’t tell me if he was going to vote for Hillary or not because I think he didn’t want to upset me.

There was definitely a little bit of tension back when we would talk about politics because I remember a point where I was like, I’m not going to talk to you about politics because we just don’t agree on certain things. I was upset that I couldn’t persuade him, and I felt like we were in a crucial situation. I was visiting Pittsburgh a lot at that time, driving across Pennsylvania, and it felt pretty clear to me that there was much more Trump support than it seemed like in the media.

But we agree in the fact that we both do not like Trump as president. It makes me happy because I feel like Tim has really listened to my view on certain issues and he’s willing to learn. Even if he decided to support a third party candidate this time, at least he seems more open to hearing my perspective. I’m really glad he’s voting for Biden because I think that’s the best possible choice in this situation.”

Tim:

“I’m a registered Republican, but I ended up voting for Gary Johnson in 2016. As a person I thought he seemed like a good guy; he wasn’t polarizing like the two main party candidates. I wanted to vote for someone I trusted and who I felt good about, and I didn’t feel that with either of those two candidates. However, I did think that Hillary would win and mine would be a throwaway vote. When she didn’t win, I had an initial feeling of dread. I was hoping that Trump would not be the person he was during the campaign, but it didn’t change.

I consider myself socially liberal and fiscally conservative, but I feel like with the current presidency, the social issues make me have a distaste for the Republican Party. During the campaign, the party at large said Trump doesn’t reflect us and we don’t support him. Then he was the Republican candidate, and the party just kowtowed to him. It was spineless how he was backed.

Politically, I don’t think Liz and I are all that different. Since that election, the more we’ve talked, we’ve each given each other a different perspective, and I think that helps. Sometimes Liz will put on left-wing political podcasts, like Pod Save America. Initially, I didn’t agree with what they were saying, but through listening more, I’ve learned and taken things away. I’ve been trying to better understand how Trump’s rhetoric and policies affect people who aren’t like me.

The main thing that’s driving me to vote for Biden is the way these past four years have gone. I never have and never will support Trump, but if things had not gone badly during his presidency, if there was a third party candidate I felt strongly for, I would consider voting for them. But the alternative to Biden not winning would be another four years of Trump, and I don’t want that again.”

Morgan, 38 & Andrew, 39

In 2016, Andrew voted for Donald Trump and Morgan voted for Hillary Clinton. This year, he’s deciding whether he’ll support Trump again or choose not to vote, while she’s voting for Biden. They’ve been together since January 2003.

Morgan:

“I’ve never been a straight party-line voter. I have strong beliefs on both sides of the aisle, and I go into almost all elections with the mindset of learning everything I can. For the 2016 election, I paid close attention to both parties’ nominations and thought there were better options from the Republican crowd. I’m not going to say all of my feelings on our current president, but I felt that he lacked the grace and respect for the office.

Have Andrew and I talked about politics more because of the Trump administration? Absolutely. I think it’s access to the information and the fact that both parties are extremely polarizing. I am a firm believer that there’s quite a divide in the country right now and the Democrats are just as guilty as the Republicans are.

There are definitely issues we can agree on, but certain topics can get extremely heated. I’m a feminist, and when it comes to women’s issues, I can be pretty close-minded to the other side. I’m passionate about a lot of social issues, and I’m really only going to bring up a topic if I have strong feelings about it. We try to be as peaceful as possible though. I think it’s important to try to hear the other person and understand where they’re coming from. We both can respect why somebody has a different view than us.

When it comes to Trump, I’ll say to Andrew, ‘Oh my gosh, did you see what he said today?’ He has the ability to say, ‘It’s not necessarily about that ridiculous thing he said, it’s about the big picture and what actually happens.’

Right now, I identify more with Biden. For the first time in my life, I would rather Andrew not vote than vote for Trump. I would rather there be just one less vote for Trump.”

Andrew:

“I’m a straight party voter, so my decision is, ‘Do I vote for the Republican candidate, or do I not vote?’ The primaries are a lot more complicated for me.

I contemplated not voting in 2016, but at the end of the day, I made the decision to vote for the Republican Party. You want as many folks on your side, in Congress and in the executive branch, as you can get. That’s how politics works now. There’s not as much working across the aisle. You just want numbers.

We don’t talk about politics very much as a couple because it tends to not be a productive conversation. Morgan gets very emotional about it and directs a lot of anger from things she sees in the media toward me. We tend not to have balanced, calm discussions about this stuff, and if you can’t, then it’s not worth talking about.

This year, my thought process is similar to 2016. There’s a possibility I don’t vote. We’ll see how the next month shakes out. I didn’t make a decision in 2016 until maybe a day or two before the election. I’ll probably do the same thing this year. But if I had to vote today, I’d vote for Trump. My view is this thing is game over. Everybody thought that in 2016 as well, but I’m fully expecting a Biden presidency. I think Trump’s done some damage with voters, and I don’t really see a path for him.

It doesn’t bother me how Morgan votes this year. I don’t really spend a lot of time thinking about it. I fully support people that want to go in a different direction. It doesn’t affect me or our relationship.”

Maria, 25 & Joe, 26

Joe did not cast a vote in the 2016 presidential election, and Maria voted for Hillary Clinton. This time around, they’ll both be voting for Biden. Maria and Joe have been together since July 2017.

Maria:

“For me, it wasn’t really a question of who to vote for. I don’t want to say I’m a one-issue voter, but when it comes to women’s rights and women having the rights over their own bodies, that’s pretty important to me. Especially when the video came out with Trump saying, ‘Grab them by the pussy,’ it was clear this is a person who doesn’t care about the other gender or other people in general. I was also voting in Pennsylvania and knew that it was important for me to vote because it’s a swing state.

We talk about politics a lot, and I was pretty mad at Joe for not voting. I do think it’s hard for young people because we move around a lot. You have to constantly register in a new state and figure out, ‘Am I going to be here longterm or should my parent’s home be where my permanent address is?’ Then ask to request an absentee ballot. I understand why a lot of people in their early twenties don’t vote because it’s so difficult to figure out the whole process.

For this election, I strongly supported Bernie [Sanders]. Right now, a lot of our systems are not working for the people. I really thought we needed someone who is progressive, who wants to change things. I think that a lot of voters in 2016 elected Trump because they wanted change, so maybe if we had someone who would do a very different type of change, that would get a lot of people motivated. But I’ll settle for Biden.”

Joe:

“I think I didn’t vote because I assumed it was fine. I wasn’t really too savvy on the residency laws, and I had just graduated. I’m from New Jersey, but then I lived in New York. I wasn’t sure where I technically lived or how to register for the right place, plus New Jersey and New York are usually pretty blue. I figured, Oh, this is going to be a landslide. I don’t even need to vote. It’s not really going to matter for me.

After Trump won, I thought, probably should have done my civic duty and voted. I didn’t anticipate what was going to transpire in the administration to come, and I would have voted for Hillary.

I kind of always felt like Biden was probably the strongest to do well in the election, the safe pick. I have to request my absentee ballot for this year. Again, where I’ll be voting is pretty blue. When you’re in a state that’s overwhelmingly one direction, you don’t really care as much. There’s less of a sense of urgency. But I want to get my vote on the record. Everyone’s trying to get out the vote, and I don’t want to be a hypocrite.

As a couple, we talk about politics a lot just because it’s more relevant. During the Obama administration, there wasn’t a new political saga every day. Now, you’re just trying to keep track.”

These interviews have been condensed and edited for clarity. Some names have been changed at the request of the participants.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

In such an unpredictable year, it would almost have been comforting to see the two dark-suited septuagenarians playing so true to type. It would have been comforting if it wasn’t so representative of the unravelling of America.

During the first presidential debate of 2020, President Donald Trump was a perfect caricature of himself, speaking in hyperbolic soundbites that couldn’t have sounded more off-the-cuff. Former vice president Joe Biden appeared alternately incredulous, amused, confused and pained by the experience, letting out a “Would you shut up?” within the first 20 minutes of Trump’s incessant interjections.

The event, exactly five weeks before election day, was expected to be the most-watched political event in United States history, including outside the U.S. If you only lasted a few minutes before turning off the TV in frustration, don’t worry—we’ve got you. Here are five takeaways from the pandemic-era spectacle.

Read this next: The Most Explosive Claims from Mary Trump’s New Book

1. Civility is broken.

Could anyone—especially any Canadian—have come away with any other impression? The void between the two candidates vying to be president is huge, and the two spent more time attacking each other than discussing the myriad catastrophes facing the United States in 2020.

Trump interrupted and disrupted moderator Chris Wallace, of Fox News, enough to make the entire scenario feel outmoded. Enough to make Wallace plead with Trump that “the country would be better served” if he made fewer interruptions. Enough to make Wallace visibly agitated, raising both his hands in frustration, agreeing with Biden near the end of the event that it had been hard to follow the debate.

More than once, Trump launched personal attacks, from Biden’s college record to his son. More than once, Biden insulted the president, calling him a “clown,” a “racist” and a “liar.” More than once, the three-way repartée devolved into yelling matches that were difficult to follow (even for viewers not engaged in a debate-themed drinking game—we see you). After all that, knowing that debate rules prohibited even a hand shake, we could still have imagined the two coming to blows at the end of the event.

2. Good luck, America.

It was not an inspiring performance on the issues that have topped the agenda in 2020. Trump downplayed his responsibility for a COVID-19 death toll that has surpassed 200,000, saying “people know what to do” in terms of their health, but took responsibility for the return of football. He flip-flopped on whether masks were helpful. “You would’ve lost far more people,” he told Biden, later pivoting to attendance at his campaign rallies. “He’s been totally irresponsible,” Biden said, attacking the president’s inconsistent approach. “He’s a fool on this.”

On systemic racism, the two traded barbs and argued about statistics without offering much in the way of policy. Trump suggested that those who are raising issues of racism this year want Americans to hate their country. “He’s racist,” Biden said. Trump accused Biden of not being able to utter the words “law and order”; Biden countered, saying: “Law and order—with justice, where people get treated fairly.” Wallace invited Trump to condemn white supremacist groups. “Sure, I’m willing to do that, but I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing, not the right wing,” Trump responded. Biden pushed him to say it. Trump half-heartedly told the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by,” then brought up the dangers of Antifa.

With orange skies and horrendous air quality setting the backdrop for west coast Americans in the lead-up to the debate, Trump dodged questions on climate science and suggested that “good forest management” would have prevented the annual burning of California.

Read this next: If You’re Confused About the Conway Drama, That’s Because It’s Complicated As Heck

3. Joe wasn’t that sleepy.

Amid plenty of attempts by the Trump campaign to portray Biden as old and fragile, pre-debate analysis held that if Biden came across “with it”—relatively sharp, relatively informed and most of all not senile, that would be enough to make the debate a success for him. If Biden exhibited any hint of a senior moment, Trump, despite any flubs of his own, would exploit the hell out of that right up until the election.

This was just the first of three debates but Biden came across reasonably alert, when he came across at all, with Trump taking a majority of the oxygen. There were moments he appeared scattered, inarticulate or flustered by the president’s aggressive approach. But there were also moments where Biden confronted Trump, repeatedly shushing him. He looked straight into the camera and addressed the American people directly, telling them this debate should be about their priorities, and, “He (Trump) doesn’t know what he’s talking about.”

On balance, that Biden didn’t fall asleep at the podium was likely enough for him to exceed expectations.

4. Many happy returns.

On Sunday, The New York Times published an extensive report on the president’s tax history, reporting that in 2016 and 2017, Trump only paid $750 in federal taxes—a bizarrely-low bill compared to previous presidents’ regular six-to-seven-figure payments. Trump denied the report but has not released tax documents publicly, despite promising to years ago.

Biden released his own tax returns not long after the story was published. In 2019, he paid some $300,000 in federal tax, having paid bills up to $3.7 million right after leaving office. (It was a hot speaking circuit in 2017.)

Pundits expected Biden to lean heavily on the Times revelations, using Trump’s bill as an example of his disconnect with the government he runs and the American people. But it was Wallace who brought Trump the heat on the question, pushing for a timeline on Trump offering proof of his claim that he in fact paid “millions of dollars” in taxes the years that the Times reported he paid $750. “You’ll see it as soon as it’s finished,” Trump said.

Read this next: Call Melania Out For Her Politics, *Not* What She Does with Her Body

5. Remember, remember, the fifth of November…

…we may still not know the results. The election is Nov. 3 but due to a large number of mail-in ballots it is possible that a final result will be delayed. The final, 100-per-cent-finished vote count for 2016 took a month. This year, we just don’t know how long it will take. Neither candidate is likely to concede on election night. But the question of whether the incumbent will accept the ultimate result—especially if it is at all close—did not really get answered on Tuesday night.

Despite an entire 15-minute segment devoted to the integrity of the 2020 election, during which Wallace pushed him on that question, it is still unclear whether Trump will accept anything other than a victory. Wallace asked if each candidate would urge their supporters to stay calm during the interim, not to engage in any civil unrest and not to declare victory. Biden answered in the affirmative, but Trump made no such pledge. He said he would encourage his supporters to go into polling places and “watch very closely,” because he expected vote-counters to “cheat.”

Instead of pushing Trump on whether he would accept a loss, Biden argued with Trump on minutia about mail-in ballots and their distribution. Trump said the ballots are “a disaster,” that ballots are being “dumped in rivers” and “this is going to be a fraud like you’ve never seen.” Biden ended the debate on almost a plea, saying he would accept the result and Trump would too. “He will too, you know why? Once the winner is declared, after all the ballots are counted, that will be the end of it.” And, for now, that was the end of it.

The floral arts have been around for ages, but for anyone who has exhausted their to-do list of tie-dye DIYs and sourdough starters, the prospect of a putting together a tidy bouquet might actually feel like a fresh idea. Whether it’s a star centerpiece or a small touch of everyday style, a charming set of stems can be a beautiful and easy way to channel your creativity and uplift your spirit.

But as anyone who has tried to assemble a thoughtful flower arrangement will know, not every decision is as easy as it looks. So we’ve picked the brains (and even taste buds) of the pros at Good Housekeeping for a set of cross-disciplinary tips to help you tap into your inner florist. Read on for the easiest ways to make your next bouquet a chic arrangement that will inspire you in every way.

Set the tone with color

The star of every bouquet is color and it should be one of the most important considerations of the arrangement you choose. “Most pros suggest sticking to flowers that are in close proximity to each other on the color wheel,” says senior home editor, Monique Valeris. So when in doubt, reach for a mix of tonal options such as classic white assortments or a bright assembly of warmer hues that’ll ensure your arrangement feels cohesive.

That said, pops of unexpected color or contrast can be a wonderful opportunity to add personality to your bouquet. Taking cues from seasonal inspiration or drawing from your individual style is the perfect way to make a bouquet feel personal. “Be sure to have fun with your arrangements,” adds Valeris, “as it’s all about putting your aesthetic on display.”

FruitFlowers

Edible Arrangements

$84.99

FruitFlowers

Edible Arrangements

$79.99

Focus on the balance

Like many other living things, flowers have the power to radiate energy throughout a space. Balancing your arrangement with its environment is key to ensuring your bouquet lives harmoniously with either you or the recipient. Valeris has been using flowers to spark a bit of joy in her at-home workspace and she notes that, “like paint or lighting, flowers can alter the ambiance of a room. For instance, a tall, multicolored arrangement can add drama to a space, while a compact monochrome bouquet, or even a single stem in a sleek vessel, can lend an air of sophisticated elegance.” For a soft visual statement that can complement any space, go for tightly arranged bouquets that are cut closer to the vase. If you’re aiming for a more spirited mood, select a tall arrangement that, when cut, will take on a freer spirit when it unfolds.

“Your vase choice is just as important as the flowers you choose to put in it,” adds Valeris. So don’t forget to consider what’s beneath your blooms, as well. Our experts recommend allowing the season to dictate the vase. So, for summer, consider mason jars or an oversized jug. In winter, try experimenting with more substantial materials such as marble or wood that will naturally showcase your arrangement.

Consider all the senses

Beyond their aesthetics, a flower’s fragrance can actually influence our sense of taste as well. “If you plan to dress your table with flowers, make sure you take a whiff before just placing them at the center,” says chief food director, Kate Merker. “Flowers are beautiful and many have incredible scents—some are very gentle and others more assertive—which means they could complement or interfere with the aroma and taste of whatever you might be serving.” For decorating a table, Ms. Merker favors the fragrant blossoms of lavender, daisies, carnations, and dahlias, which tend to work well with her dishes and can sometimes add additional dimension to the eating experience.

Complementing food with flowers can be tricky, but when successfully paired (even as a decoration or ingredient), the result is guaranteed to deliver a wow factor every time. For an effortlessly beautiful and expertly composed way to weave together the senses, turn to the new FruitFlowers pairings by Edible arrangements. Not only are all the combinations of florals and delicious chocolate-covered fruit made to play off each other perfectly, but your selection can be completely customized. Whatever the occasion, it’s the ideal arrangement for all the senses.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

There’s a lot going on right now in the world, so you may have initially missed what’s happening in your own backyard, specifically in Nova Scotia. But, make no mistake: You should be paying attention now to the clash happening between Indigenous and non-Indigenous fishers.

On September 17, the Sipekne’katik First Nation launched its own Mi’kmaq-regulated, rights-based lobster fishery in St. Marys Bay, an area of water located about 250 kilometres west of Halifax. According to CBC, it’s believed to be the first fishery of its kind in the province, and on the day of the launch, the Sipekne’katik First Nation held a ceremony to launch its fishing fleet and give out permits and licenses. Unfortunately, the announcement wasn’t celebrated by everyone in the province, and sparked violent protests in nearby Saulnierville among local non-Indigenous fishers—coming to a head on the weekend of September 20.

For those of us outside the province, a lot of questions have arisen since catching the news reports of this clash, such as: Why did the Sipekne’katik First Nations launch their fishery now? Why are non-Indigenous fishers so angry? Is this legal? And how do we resolve this issue?

Here’s everything you need to know about the ongoing dispute between Indigenous and non-Indigenous fishers in Nova Scotia, including what it has to do with an over 20-year-old Supreme Court ruling.

Who are the Sipekne’katik First Nation?

The Sipekne’katik First Nation is one of 13 First Nations located in the Nova Scotia, and is the second largest Mi’kmaq band in Nova Scotia, according to the community’s website. They are located in Hants County, the traditional territory of Sɨkɨpne’katik, AKA Shubenacadie, N.S., only 68 kilometres outside of Halifax.

For those who may be unfamiliar, Sipekne’katik First Nation belongs to the wider Mi’kmaq nation; the largest of the North American Indigenous tribes, per Britannica. The Mi’kmaq people traditionally occupy Canada’s Eastern Maritime Provinces, and are among the original inhabitants of the Atlantic region.

So, how did this dispute start?

While the dispute may seemingly have begun with the launch of a self-regulated Indigenous lobster fishery in the traditional territory of Takmeteq, AKA Saulnierville, N.S., recent clashes are actually part of a decades-long conflict coming to a head. Indigenous fishermen launched the fishery—with the intent of catching lobster outside of the season, after what Chief Terrence Paul—fisheries lead for the Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaw Chiefs—told CBC was years of attempts to  negotiate a deal with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), stemming from complications and ambiguity around a 1999 Marshall decision in the Supreme Court of Canada (more on that later). Their operation is considered to be outside of DFO’s regulations.

Read this next: Here’s Why This Indigenous Business Owner Said No to a Dragon

In response to the fishery’s launch—which grants fishing licenses to its band members who meet certain requirements, and grants 50 traps per license issued—non-Indigenous fishers attempted to block boats going out to fish, allegedly cut trap lines on Indigenous property (ensuring they wouldn’t be able to retrieve their traps), removed traps from the water and gathered in front of an alleged buyer’s home.

New strategy from the commercial fishermen in south west Nova Scotia today: they’re turning their attention to those who they believe are buying Mi’kmaw-harvested lobster. Big crowd gathered outside the house of an alleged buyer this morning. pic.twitter.com/VbcG4naBv8

— Taryn Grant (@tarynalgrant) September 21, 2020

Overnight on September 18, Indigenous fishermen put up blockades made of lobster traps at the Saulnierville wharf in response to commercial fishermen they say were trying to intimidate them.

In a September 20 statement, Sipekne’katik Chief Mike Sack said of the ongoing vandalism: “It is so disheartening to have had a progressive meeting with the Minister yesterday to reinforce that we are following our moderate livelihood fishery plan and to be repeatedly sabotaged by this criminal conduct.”

Why are non-Indigenous fishermen so upset?

The main issue non-Indigenous fishers claim to be pushing back against is that, according to them, Indigenous fishermen—by fishing year-round—are fishing illegally. They have  also said that they’re worried fishing out of season will negatively affect the lobster stocks, as it’s occurring during a time when they are breeding.

Can the Indigenous fishery legally fish outside of season?

Technically, yes. And there’s history behind this reasoning. In September 1999, a Supreme Court decision—known as The Marshall Decision—declared that Donald Marshall Jr., a Mi’kmaq man from Membertou, N.S. was justified in catching and selling 210 kilograms of eel with an illegal net and without a licence because it was in the pursuit of moderate livelihood. This decision was based on the Peace and Friendship Treaties that were signed in 1760–61 between the Mi’kmaq and the British Crown, and are still valid to this day. These treaties posit that Mi’kmaq  have the right to harvest and sell fish, wildlife as well as wild fruit and berries in order to obtain a moderate livelihood.

“Treaties were there to provide the orderly settlement of Canada, while still preserving the traditional lifestyle and a means of livelihood for Indigenous people,” explains Ron Maurice, managing partner and founder of Maurice Law Barristers & Solicitors, the only Indigenous-owned national law firm in Canada. “So they were always intended to be balanced approaches, trying to reconcile very competing objectives; taking up land for settlement obviously would have created problems or friction.” As opposed to contemporary legislative laws, these treaties are “solemn agreements,” Maurice says. “They’re not just deals that could be broken down by the government because they had legislative authority,” he continues. “They’re not international treaties, but they’re not mere contracts either. So they’re intended to be solemn agreements where the Crown is expected to honour its obligations.”

In the case of  “moderate livelihoods,” Maurice says the treaty rights refer to Indigenous peoples’ right to not accumulate wealth, but to make a living from fishing (within reason of not over-fishing the stock). “If there’s a recognition of a treaty right, that means that prevails over and supersedes other privileges,” he says. For example, Maurice says, if you need 100,000 lobster to  maintain the health of the stock, but there’s 110,000 lobsters available, that means 10,000 are available to be fished commercially. Under Treaty Rights, “the First Nations would have priority over other discretionary users.” It’s an equation that is probably frustrating for non-Indigenous commercial fishermen—something Maurice understands—”but that is also a reflection of the treaty rights that predates a lot of things that are going on today,” he says.

Another frustrating issue? The Crown government never clearly outlined what “moderate livelihood” exactly means or how it should be measured. For Megan Bailey—an associate professor and Canada Research Chair in integrated ocean and coastal governance at Dalhousie University in Halifax—the response from commercial fishermen arises from this lack of clarification, as well as a misunderstanding around Treaty Rights and regulations.

Bailey points to the fact that there has been a movement of licenses to First Nations bands in the form of commercial communal licenses—licenses which are given to bands and which they determine who in the community can fish. “So I think there’s a bit of confusion around whether or not  commercial communal [licenses] were supposed to support a moderate livelihood, because they’re supposed to bring benefits to the band,” she says. “I think in part that’s leading to this idea of ‘why do they need a livelihood fishery when they already had this other access?’; but they’re different things.”

Is it actually detrimental to fish out of season?

While commercial fishermen may be nervous about the moderate livelihood fishery trapping lobster out-of-season (between May and November) having a negative affect on lobster stock (ie: over-fishing or depleting the stock), Bailey says that’s not necessarily a risk here. “It really depends on the scale and it depends on the conservation measures that go along with it,” she says of the moderate livelihood fishery’s operations. “[They’ve] looked at what the regulations are for commercial fishermen in terms of the size of lobster you can keep—if they’re soft shell they need to be thrown back, if they’re not a certain size, they need to be thrown back, if they’re a female that has eggs, she has to be thrown back—so they’ve adopted those kinds of regulations.  Those things help.” In other words, a summer fishery (i.e. out of season) with these regulations may be totally fine, and a summer fishery without may not. “It’s not really black or white,” Bailey says. But, “at the current scale and with regulations in place, I would say it’s sustainable.”

So why does Canada have these fishing seasons and regulations in place?

It has to do with a few things, number one being product supply. As Bailey describes, in Canada we prioritize hard shell lobsters. In the Maritimes—specifically Lobster Fishing Area 34 and 33, the area in the news right now—fisheries are closed between May and November. “That’s during the molting period of the lobster when they’re very soft shelled,” she says. “So that’s an inferior product.” From a biological standpoint, Bailey points to the state of Maine in the United States, as an example of somewhere that fishes year-round, catching soft-shelled lobster as well. “So there isn’t a biological reason for them to have seasons.” Meaning that although in Canada we give lobster a break during their molting period, this is more for an economic and product supply point of view, not because there’ll be any negative affects on the lobster or the ocean.

Something else important to recognize? As Bailey says, no fishery in and of itself is sustainable or unsustainable. Just because a fishery operates in-season (ie: during the winter in Canada), doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the better option. It’s important, Bailey says, to consider the cumulative impact of having both winter and summer fishing.  “We now have a summer fishery and a winter fishery and the winter fishery is not necessarily taking into account the mortality from the summer fishery. So these are obviously additive issues and we can’t really manage one of those fisheries without taking into account the other ones,” she says. “So for me,  it’s not an issue of summer versus winter and which is better, you have to take into account the scale of the fishery in relation; so a small summer fishery might be more sustainable than a large winter fishery, for example.”

Read this next: Here’s What’s Happening on Wet’suwet’en Territory Now

Why would Indigenous communities want to fish outside of the season?

There are many reasons Indigenous fishermen would choose to fish outside of the season, paramount among them being the fact that they want to provide for themselves and their families. While commercial communal licenses are great, they’re really for the benefit of the community. “As far as I understand it, those commercial communal licenses go to the band and then the band determines who fishes those and the benefits of that license is supposed to go back to the community,” Bailey says. This is where the commercial communal and moderate livelihood fishery differ. “The moderate livelihood fishery is really an individual fishery and it’s the right for any Mi’kmaq to go out, to catch and sell lobster to feed his or her family and extended family. And so it’s really about earning a living from lobster to support one family;  it’s a difference between a community benefit and an individual benefit.” In case you’re wondering, non-Indigenous commercial fishermen automatically fall into the latter, meaning every license and vessel is individualized.

Bailey, for her part, supports the Mi’kmaq’s right to fish year-round, within reason. “I think it needs to be taken into context with when all the other catches are taking place,” she says. But yes, from an individual’s livelihood perspective and from a food provisioning and sustainability perspective,  I would say that if we looked at environmental, economic and social reasons, fishing all year might be what make sense.” But, she says, it’s up to the bands. “I think each band and First Nation has their right to say, ‘we want to be fishing all year.’ That might not be something that each band wants, it’s important to recognize that.”

So, who’s in the right?

It’s complicated. At the heart of this is a Treaty Rights issue. While Maurice says that as a Treaty Right—Indigenous fishermen’s abilities to fish for a moderate livelihood supersedes other privileges—that doesn’t mean that it’s entirely black and white, because, just as Indigenous fishermen have a stake in and their livelihood rooted in fishing, so too do the non-Indigenous fishermen on the East Coast. “Really what it comes down to, and maybe the reason why there is such tension, is it really amounts to a zero sum game,” Maurice says. “So if First Nations have a priority allocation over the fishery recognized as a Treaty Right [and] entrenched in the constitution, then it’s a problem in that means there’s going to be winners and losers. Which is a tough pill to swallow as I’m sure there are many fishermen on the East coast  that have maintained the livelihood for generations.”

In an email to FLARE, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans said: “Lobster stocks across the Maritimes Region remain healthy,” and that “DFO will continue to support the research and adaptive management measures necessary to ensure a sustainable lobster fishery.” In a September 21 statement, Minister of Fisheries Bernadette Jordan and Minister Carolyn Bennett said they share the concerns of the Assembly Chiefs for the safety of their people. “Reconciliation is a Canadian imperative and we all have a role to play in it. What is occurring does not advance this goal, nor does it support the implementation of First Nation Treaty rights, or a productive and orderly fishery.”

How will this be resolved?

While the DFO and Indigenous leaders continue to be in discussion, a good place to start would be with outlining and clarifying what exactly “moderate livelihood” means, something Maurice believes can happen through agreement between all the parties in order to balance competing objectives. It’s a task that he acknowledges is easier said than done, considering people’s livelihoods are at stake.

Read this next: Canada Asked for a Report on MMIWG. Now It’s Ignoring It

While Bailey says that tensions seem to have died down a little after the September 2o meeting between Chief Sack and Minister of Fisheries Bernadette Jordan, that’s not to say that there won’t be more tension down the line—and at other moderate livelihood fisheries if they choose to open in other areas of the Maritimes. “This is one wharf and one band,” she says. “The worry is that this could play out across wharves all over the Maritimes and Gulf region.” In her personal opinion, Bailey says that the Federal government, First Nations government and Chief and Band Counsellors need to come together and start a conversation around what a moderate livelihood exactly looks like. And they need to include the commercial sector in these discussions.

“I think part of the worry that commercial fishermen have is that they’re not being told anything. There’s been no leadership from the federal government, so it’s a very uncertain time for them.” While Bailey doesn’t think the launch of moderate livelihood fisheries means commercial fishermen will be pushed out of the fishery, if they are going to be pushed out, they need to know.  “There’s a huge capitalization in the fishery; so a lot of people have a lot of money invested in both gear and licenses. And if they’re not going to be able to continue using those, that’s a huge issue for our products and for the economy. So  transparency, leadership and collaboration, I think those three things are going to be really important.”

As if 2020 could get any worse. On September 14, reports emerged that immigrants in an ICE detention centre in Georgia are allegedly being coerced or tricked into hysterectomies without their consent. The revelation came from a whistleblower named Dawn Wooten, a former nurse at the Irwin County Detention Center. According to the BBC, the facility houses immigrants detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). In her complaint, which was filed with the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General, Wooten expresses concern over the high number of hysterectomies she says are being performed on Spanish-speaking women while in custody. “We’ve questioned among ourselves like, goodness he’s taking everybody’s stuff out…That’s his speciality, he’s the uterus collector,” Wooten said in her complaint. The nurse also further alleges that detained women told her they didn’t fully understand why they had to get a hysterectomy and that the centre’s doctor removed the wrong ovary from one young detainee.

These are horrifying claims. Here is everything you need to know about the allegations of coerced hysterectomies and forced sterilization. Because it’s a thing, and it happens in Canada, too.

What exactly is ICE being accused of doing?

The most egregious accusation in Wooten’s complaint pertains to the reproductive health of Spanish-speaking women in the detention centre. According to the nurse’s complaint, a number of migrant women were given hysterectomies (a procedure to remove a woman’s uterus), either without their consent or with limited understanding about why they needed one. Speaking to MSNBC on September 15, Wooten—who is represented by the Government Accountability Project, a whistleblower protection organization, and Project South, a social justice advocacy group—elaborated on her concern, recalling when she first found out something was going on. “I had several detained women on numerous occasions that would come to me and say, ‘Miss Wooten, I had [a] hysterectomy. Why?’ I had no answers as to why they had those procedures,” she said. “And one lady walked up to me, between October 19 and July 2, and she said ‘What is he? Is he the uterus collector? Does he collect uteruses?’ And I asked her what does she mean, and she says: ‘Everyone that I’ve talked to has had a hysterectomy.’”

According to Project South, a detained woman also spoke to the organization, revealing that she had spoken with five women at the facility who’d received hysterectomies in the time between October and December 2019. According to this source, when talking about the procedure, the women “reacted confused when explaining why they had one done.”

“When I met all these women who had had surgeries, I thought this was like an experimental concentration camp,” the woman told Project South. “It was like they’re experimenting with our bodies.”

Read this next: FYI, Boycotting Wayfair Isn’t The Best Way to Help Migrants

In addition to these allegations, Wooten also claims to have witnessed several instances of medical negligence related to COVID-19, including the centre refusing to test detainees for the novel coronavirus, fabricating medical records, allowing employees to work while symptomatic and awaiting COVID-19 test results, withholding information from detainees and employees about who has tested positive, underreporting COVID-19 cases, and allowing the transfer of detained immigrants (including some who were COVID-positive).

Wooten also says that she was reprimanded for missing work after coming down with COVID-19 symptoms, facing “retaliatory reprimand and demotion” as she waited for test results.

What is a hysterectomy?

If the term hysterectomy sounds incredibly scary to you, it shouldn’t, according to Dr. Dustin Costescu, a Family Planning Specialist in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at McMaster University. The procedure is actually very common in the United States and Canada. “A hysterectomy usually involves a surgery—either using key holes in the belly or making an incision on the skin like a C-section scar—where the uterus and cervix are removed,” Costescu explains. In some rare cases, he says, the procedure will be done via a vaginal surgery. “[A hysterectomy] removes the part that bleeds every month and that [means] removing the womb where pregnancies take place in some patients. They may also have removal of the fallopian tubes and ovaries.”

Generally, hysterectomies are performed for patients when they either have cancer or pre-cancerous changes to the uterus or ovaries. A hysterectomy might also be performed when a patient has heavy bleeding and all other options have failed, Costescu says. But that doesn’t mean that hysterectomies are a doctor’s first choice for treatment. “The standard in Ontario, for instance, to have a hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding or heavy periods would be to fail at least one highly effective alternative,” Costescu says. Meaning the patient would have to have not responded to an IUD, and endometrial ablation, or other hormonal options to mitigate the bleeding. “So we wouldn’t jump to a hysterectomy that early.”

When it comes to women who may be incarcerated or detained, Costescu says: “Usually for a hysterectomy to be performed in these circumstances, [it would be because] somebody unexpectedly has a cancer or  pre-cancer diagnosis; but in these patients you would have detected the cancer on biopsies or tests prior to doing the surgery.”

Is a hysterectomy the same thing as sterilization?

While the terms “forced hysterectomies” and “forced sterilization” have been used interchangeably in reporting on the allegations about what’s happening at ICE detainment centres, hysterectomies and sterilization aren’t *exactly* the same thing. “There’s an important distinction to be made between a hysterectomy and sterilization,” Costescu says.

As opposed to a hysterectomy, which can take on different forms (for example, in a partial hysterectomy, the patient’s uterus is removed, which allows them to continue to ovulating, but unable to carry a child, while a complete hysterectomy involves removing a patient’s uterus and ovaries, prompting immediate menopause), sterilization typically involves cutting or blocking the fallopian tubes in order to prevent the sperm and egg from meeting, per Healthline.

Both procedures leave the patient unable to become pregnant.

The issue lies with consent

But while the process behind the procedures may be different, being subjected to either one without consent or a full understanding of *what* procedure you’re having or *why* you’re having it is not only incredibly upsetting, but also ethically wrong. While Costescu says that it’s difficult to glean what exactly is medically happening to the detained women who are reporting hysterectomies from reading the reports, “it sounds like some of these women did undergo sterilization procedures without their consent.”

And that is not good. “As a physician,  my initial thought is one of disgust and disappointment,” he says of the reports. “No clinician would be considered professional [for performing] any surgery without patient consent.” And that includes when said patients have English as a second language. While Costescu says that, theoretically, there could be a small subset of patients who are newcomers to a country like Canada who, upon arrival, are found to have medical issues or need medical care resulting in a hysterectomy, “it would be very unlikely that such a large number of patients would really need this sort of aggressive management.” Not to mention the fact that even if the detainees *did* need this procedure, it’s imperative that they understand what’s happening to them and why it’s happening to them. The only exception is in truly dire situations.

“The only situation where you would do a hysterectomy on a patient without express consent would be [one] where the patient is basically experiencing a catastrophic or traumatic bleed,” Costescu says. “In gynecology, that’s almost never.” In addition, Costescu says these types of situations are more related to excessive bleeding due to childbirth or a major trauma like a car accident. “Otherwise, there’s always enough time to get a proper consent from a patient. [Which means] they always have to know what they’re having done, why they’re having it done, the risks, the benefits and any alternatives—that’s standard consent for anything you would do with any patient.”

Read this next: Should You Be Worried About Wayfair and Human Trafficking?

So how does this happen? While it’s impossible to know what the motives behind a doctor’s decision to perform mass hysterectomies may be, in many of these cases, Costescu says, physicians can fall into one of two categories: a legitimate lack of respect for patient autonomy, meaning doctors that truly feel that they’re better than the patient and know what’s best for them, or the misguided idea that they’re somehow saving these patients from themselves. “Both are narcissistic beliefs,” Costescu says. “But when we think about structural racism more and more, I think it’s more likely that this is more of a lack of respect and propagating false stereotypes to serve these patients.”

Regardless of intent, if someone is forced into receiving a hysterectomy or sterilization against their will, it can be a difficult and emotional experience. This is something Costescu has seen firsthand with patients who have chosen to undergo hysterectomies. “Many of my patients will actually grieve the loss of their reproduction, even if they weren’t planning on having pregnancies,” he says. “We have a strong, emotional attachment to our reproductive organs, regardless. So I think anyone whose had a hysterectomy is allowed to grieve that loss of fertility.

“So the fact that the patients didn’t understand the reason they were having it done and were not offered alternatives really speaks to them not having consent and this would be considered assault.”

Are forced hysterectomies ever legal?

No. Full stop. “Outside of an emergency, doctors in Canada may not perform this or any invasive procedure on an adult patient without consent,” says Karen Segal, a labour and human rights lawyer and a board member of CLAIHR (Canadian Lawyers for International Human Rights). In fact, it’s what Segal refers to as “an abhorrent human rights violation.”

“Forced sterilization violates numerous human rights and international law conventions,” she continues. “Forced sterilization is a form of genocide and a crime against humanity.” Referring to the Convention on Genocide, which includes “imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group,” Segal says that international and regional human rights bodies have recognized forced sterilization as an act that “constitutes torture, and cruel, unusual and inhumane treatment.” Further, she says, “It has also been defined by some international courts as a form of sexual violence and violence against women.” In the United States, where detainees are being held by ICE, the right to equality without discrimination on the basis of sex is protected in the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, a document the U.S. has signed. “This convention requires states to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of health care in order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, access to health care services, including those related to family planning,”she says. And in addition, this document protects the rights of women “to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and to have access to the information, education and means to enable them to exercise these rights.”

So Sparknotes version: giving women a hysterectomy without their full consent violates these rights.

Why would someone give forced hysterectomies?

While any guesses as to the intention behind the alleged hysterectomies is speculative until there’s a thorough investigation, there are several reasons physicians have historically performed forced sterilization, the central of which is population control. This is a tried and true practice that has been implemented in both past and current genocides. “Reproductive control—whether that’s forced childbirth or forced sterilization—has historically been used to control populations. So if the hysterectomy is being performed as a means of population control, that constitutes a war crime,” Costescu says of the gravity of the surgery.

Another reason hysterectomies could be given without consent, according to Bernard Dickens, Professor Emeritus of Health Law and Policy at the University of Toronto’s Law School and Co-Director of the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Program, is due to the for-profit medical system in the United States. “It could be that they are earning income for doing it,” he says. “It could be money-making, but it could also be if you’re dealing with younger surgeons, there’s the experience of doing them.” As Dickens points out, a hysterectomy is a surgery that has to be done on a living person (translation: it can’t be effectively practiced on corpses in med school). “But again, this is exploiting abominable pain.”

Ultimately, in the case of the detained women in Georgia, Dickens says an independent investigation has to be done into the allegations and any of the facility’s justifications. 

What has the response been?

Since the allegations were first made public, people have been pretty outraged—if not entirely unsurprised—with Democratic lawmakers calling for an investigation into the claims.

Yesterday, I was briefed by attorneys representing women who were subjected to forced, invasive procedures by a gynecologist connected with a private, for-profit detention center in GA. It has become clear that the initial reports are likely part of a horrific pattern of conduct.

— Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) September 16, 2020

On September 15, US immigration said an external watchdog organization had been dispatched to investigate Wooten’s complaints.

In a statement to FLARE, Dr. Ada Rivera, Medical Director of the ICE Health Services Corp (IHSC) said that while the accusations will be fully investigated by an independent office, “ICE vehemently disputes the implication that detainees are used for experimental medical procedures.

“ICE’s mission is to protect the homeland and to swiftly and quickly remove people from the country; the health, welfare and safety of ICE detainees is one of the agency’s highest priorities, any assertion or claim to the contrary is false and intentionally misleading.” In addition, Rivera’s statement noted that all female ICE detainees receive “routine, age-appropriate gynecological and obstetrical health care, consistent with recognized community guidelines for women’s health services.” And stated that: “According to U.S. Immigration and Enforcement (ICE) data, since 2018, only two individuals at Irwin County Detention Center were referred to certified, credentialed medical professionals at gynecological and obstetrical health care facilities for hysterectomies in compliance with National Commission on Correctional Health Care (NCCHC) standards. Based on their evaluations, these specialists recommended hysterectomies. These recommendations were reviewed by the facility clinical authority and approved.”

“To be clear, medical care decisions concerning detainees are made by medical personnel, not by law enforcement personnel. Detainees are afforded informed consent, and a medical procedure like a hysterectomy would never be performed against a detainee’s will.”

Read this next: These Brands Have All Donated to Trump’s Campaign

Wait, does forced sterilization happen in Canada?

It’s important to know that forced sterilization has historically occurred in our country as well—and it’s still happening. Forced sterilization has disproportionately affected Indigenous women in Canada, with dozens of women coming forward since at least 2017 to share their stories of being coerced into sterilization, according to a report by the International Justice Resource Centre. In many cases, these women were sterilized by health practitioners, and as Saskatchewan-based lawyer Alisa Lombard told CBC in an April 2019 article, “some of the women did not realize that physicians, nurses, other health-care professionals, the government—couldn’t make decisions for them about their bodies.”

In 2018, a group of Indigenous women in Saskatchewan brought a class-action suit against the Saskatoon Health Authority. In the lawsuit, the women claimed that doctors—from several decades ago and up to the 2000s—had either forcibly sterilized or tricked Indigenous women into giving consent for sterilization when they were under stress or heavily drugged.

It’s a horrific historical and contemporary legacy, and one that shouldn’t be repeated. “Hysterectomies are one of the most common surgeries performed in the U.S. and Canada, but they themselves are not without risks,” Costescu says. “I think what we don’t know yet about these cases is: were there any harms associated with it? Patients who undergo removal of the ovaries before menopause may need to go on hormone therapy. So we don’t know at this point if these patients are able to access healthcare beyond that; are they getting help in these detainment centres?

“It’s imperative patients understand that no surgery is risk free, and that’s why we want them to make this decision. As a gynecologist, we talk many patients out of hysterectomies if there are other options they can try, and then we use hysterectomy as a last resort. So that’s why this is such a shocking case.”

It’s that time of the year again when tech lovers tune into the fall Apple Event and salivate over their latest innovations. Tim Cook kicked off the virtual event on September 15 by talking about how inspiring it is to see how people adapted to COVID-19, and how the company feels responsible to “continue making products that enrich people’s lives in meaningful ways.” The tech giant is poised to do that with products, services and updates that focus on some of our most precious assets: time, family and perhaps most relevant, health. (Bonus: Some of the most exciting new Apple products and services are available at more accessible price points.)

Here’s what’s new from Apple including the latest in Apple Watch, iPad and the new Fitness+ subscription service. 

Apple Watch Series 6

This watch is seriously revolutionary. The all-new Series 6 maintains the majority of the same features from Series 5, but with an even greater focus on health and impressive new hardware improvements to look out for. From better sleep tracking, Family Setup (which now allows family members *without* an iPhone benefit from connectivity), and even automatic hand-washing detection that initiates a 20-second countdown, this watch was definitely made for these ~unprecedented~ times.

Series 6 also comes with a new dual-core processor based on the A13 Bionic from the iPhone 11, which is optimized for Apple Watch, and a S6 System in Package (SiP) which makes apps run 20% faster than the previous model while maintaining its 18-hour battery life. It also comes with a new sensor that measures the user’s blood oxygen saturation, whether the user is active or asleep, in only 15 seconds. A person’s blood oxygen saturation is related to how well oxygenated blood is travelling throughout the user’s body and provides insight on your overall health, and even flags a potential COVID-19 symptom. 

On top of that, Apple has announced that they’re conducting three new studies with various health research organizations and universities, including the University of Toronto, to improve Apple Watch’s health features and potentially be able to track early signs of respiratory conditions like COVID-19.

Other notable features: The aforementioned Family Setup, not to mention the enhanced Always-On display which makes it easier for users to see the watch face in bright sunlight, and Fitness+, a new personalized fitness experience (more on that later). 

Design: The new Series 6 will come in silver, space grey and a few *new* case colours including blue, red and gold stainless steel. Apple is also introducing an ultra light Solo Loop band that eliminates buckles or straps and comes in soft silicone or braided yarn. 

Price: Series 6 with GPS starts at $529 CAD, and Series 6 with GPS + Cellular starts at $659 CAD

Read this next: Everything You Need to Know About the New COVID Alert App

Apple Watch SE

Just like the iPhone, the Apple Watch now comes in a relatively more affordable option: Meet the Apple Watch SE. Packed with essential Apple Watch features like the same always-on altimeter in Apple Watch Series 6, plus the latest motion sensors and microphone, the SE is a great entry point for new users. 

Other notable features: Advanced Retina display, a S5 System in Package (SIP) and dual-core processor that delivers fast performance up to two times faster than Apple Watch Series 3, enhanced fitness features that can detect elevation changes when you’re working out, and Family Setup. 

Design: The Apple Watch SE case features slim borders and curved corners and is 30% larger than Series 3. It will also come in three case finishes made of 100% recycled aluminum, which will be compatible with all Apple Watch bands. 

Price: Apple Watch SE with GPS starts at $369 CAD, and Apple Watch SE with GPS + Cellular starts at $429 CAD

Eighth-Generation iPad

The eighth-generation iPad features the A12 Bionic chip, which delivers 40% faster CPU performance and enhanced graphics. This new iPad is also designed to be environmentally friendly. It uses 100% recycled aluminum enclosure, 100% recycled tin for its main logic board, wood fibre packaging, and is energy efficient. This supports Apple’s goal of being completely carbon neutral by 2030, and we absolutely love that for the planet. 

Other notable features: The eight-generation iPad features a 10.2-inch Retina display and iPadOS 14, which includes a new compact design for FaceTime and regular calls, new sidebars, redesigned widgets, large Multi-Touch display, further integration of the Apple Pencil which makes note-taking easier by detecting handwritten text, and more. 

Design: The new iPad will come in silver, space grey,and gold finishes.

Price: $429 CAD for the Wi-Fi model, and $599 CAD for the Wi-Fi + Cellular model

Read this next: 7 Items That Will Majorly Improve Your Home Office

iPad Air

The all-new iPad Air comes with the A14 Bionic, Apple’s most advanced chip to date. It also features a new all-screen design, a 10.9-inch Liquid Retina display, and a next-generation Touch ID sensor integrated into the top button to provide secure authentication. Like the eight-generation iPad, the iPad Air uses 100% recycled aluminum enclosure and 100% recycled tin for its main logic board. It’s also energy-efficient and uses wood fibre packaging.

Other notable features: An upgraded camera featuring a 7MP front-facing FaceTime camera and 12MP rear camera, stereo speakers in landscape mode, USB-C connector instead of lighting, and iPadOS 14. 

Design: Borrowing the same sleek features as the iPad Pro, the new iPad Air is now completely redesigned and will come in silver, space grey, rose gold, green (my personal fave), and sky blue. 

Price: $779 CAD for the Wi-Fi model and $949 CAD for the Wi-Fi + Cellular model

More exciting Apple updates

iOS 14

Communication will look slightly different on iOS 14. Say goodbye to full-screen calls (see you never!) because a new compact call display that *just* appears at the top of the screen is finally here. We will also be getting a new picture in picture feature so we can use other apps while FaceTiming, and we can *finally* directly respond to specific messages on iMessage group chats (a feature available on WhatsApp and Facebook Chat). The new iOS 14 also includes redesigned widgets for the home screen and a new App Library that changes how we organize our apps. 

Apple One

You can now get Apple Music, Apple TV+, Apple Arcade, Apple News+, Apple Fitness+, iCloud and more in just one simple subscription plan. Price starts at $15.95 CAD per month for Individual which includes 50GB of iCloud storage, $20.95 CAD per month for Family (can be shared up to six family members) which includes 200GB of iCloud storage, and $33.95 CAD per month for Premier (can be shared up to six family members) which includes 2TB of iCloud storage. 

Apple Fitness+

This app built for the Apple Watch features access to diverse studio-style workouts from HIIT, yoga, dance, core and more to follow on iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV, and is perfect for our current home workout reality. During your workout, metrics like your heart rate or countdown timer can also be shown on the screen. The price starts at $12.99 CAD per month and $99.99 CAD per year. 

Read this next: Yes, I *Will* Spend My Rent on Apple AirPods Pro

What are the biggest differences between the Apple Series 6 vs. SE? 

The new health features on Apple Series 6 (like the Blood Oxygen app) won’t be available in SE. Series 6 will also come with the latest S6 dual-core processor, while the SE will have the S5 dual-core processor. (Translation: Series 6 apps will load even faster than the already-fast SE.) 

What’s the best bang for your buck? 

The Apple Watch SE and iPad Air! As someone who’s never owned or really cared for an Apple Watch before, I’m seriously considering taking the plunge with the SE. For $200 less, you can get all of the essential features the Apple Series 6 has to offer. 

While the eight-generation iPad is cheaper, I personally feel like the iPad Air is a better pickup. The A14 Bionic is definitely a huge selling point and it has a lot of features from the iPad Pro. Also, I think it’s time for me to retire my very old school iPad Mini 2. 

And the big question: Where is the iPhone 12? 

Sorry to disappoint, but it looks like we’ll have to wait a little while longer for the iPhone 12. But it might not be *too* long: tech experts are predicting that the launch will be coming next month. Fingers crossed! 

Last year I took my first trip to Ghana. What was supposed to be a 10-day trip of rest and relaxation turned into so much more. Instead of spending the last few days partying, I made the last minute decision to visit Kokrobite, a beach town just outside the capital city of Accra. Standing on the edge of the Atlantic Ocean, I felt captivated, mystified even, watching kids surf. While I was familiar with the sport—my interest dates back to the 2002 release of Blue Crush—this was unlike anything I’d ever witnessed. Black bodies gleefully bobbed and weaved with the pulse of the ocean, the same one our ancestors had been forced to leave centuries before.

They moved with such joy and ease. I wanted to feel that, too. A reprieve, even if for a few moments, from the exhausting burdens placed on Black womxn, like the fear of being killed by police while we sleep. In a world that can feel suffocating, moments of solace are life-saving.

Weeks after returning stateside, I booked my first surf lesson despite the remnants of a frigid East Coast winter that hung in the air and clung to the water. It didn’t matter that it took nearly two hours and a shuttle connection to journey from the cacophonous streets of Harlem to the murky forest-green waters of Rockaway Beach. The joy and peace I felt back in Ghana was now within my grasp. Shuffling into the water, zipped securely into a rented wetsuit, I clung tight to the Styrofoam board connected to my right ankle. I felt uneasy: I was now at the whim of the ocean, and realized I was the lone Black student in a class full of stereotypical surfer types.

As I learned how to push myself up and glide one foot in front of the other into an awkward sumo stance, perfectly timed with the rise of the ocean’s kinetic energy, I thought of Ghana. Communities of the African diaspora, more specifically on Africa’s Gold Coast, have been surfing for centuries—the earliest record dates back to 1640, nearly two centuries before it was practiced on American shores, according to Kevin Dawson in his book Undercurrents of Power. Yet Black people are almost always absent in historical and pop culture renderings of the aquatic pastime.

The transatlantic slave trade generationally complicated our relationship with water, and for some, this turbulent relationship remains. Segregated beaches and pools in the 1950s and ’60s meant that Black folks’ access to water was limited at best. The opportunity to learn how to swim or be introduced to aquatic sports like surfing didn’t really exist. Not surprisingly, a generation of Black folks grew up either afraid or unaware of the water’s ability to heal. But despite our erasure from the sport, there seems to be a growing enthusiasm amongst Black womxn for the water, and surfing in particular. Instagram accounts like @BlackGirlsSurf, @BrownGirlSurf, and @TexturedWaves are helping to normalize images of Black bodies riding waves.

This content is imported from Instagram. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

I believe it’s the inextricable place of water in our history, from the shores of Africa to our passage to America, that has led to womxn like myself and LA-based journalist Darian Symoné Harvin to embark upon a sport in which we rarely see ourselves represented.

“I’ve always loved the water and been a huge daredevil,” Harvin says, “Surfing felt like the sort of sport that would take some time to get good at. I was up for the challenge.” She says that standing on a shoreline makes her forget her skin color and instead reminds her of the infinite possibilities available to her. Surfing reminds her of her humanity in a society that doesn’t give it willingly, and inspires her to take up space instead of feeling small, something I also experienced learning how to ride waves.

Black womxn earn 38 percent less than white men and 21 percent less than white women and often suffer from compounded discrimination. Erica Chidi, a health educator and CEO of the community-based education center LOOM, told me that “the baseline for Black womxn is stress.” She adds that “Living in a Black body and how society perceives [that] body makes very mundane, very routine activities have an underpinning of extreme discomfort.”

Traversing life with racially induced anxiety—because not doing so can have dire consequences—and being asked to explain things on behalf of an entire race quickly becomes tiresome, especially lately. As this country has begun to confront its racist past over the last few months, the brunt of the work—in the form of tough conversations about white supremacy and organizing to dismantle it—has fallen on Black womxn. Earlier this summer, the Black surf collective Textured Waves, like other surf groups, began organizing paddle outs in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. At one of these events in June, more than 300 surfers paddled out to chant George Floyd’s name and sing “Happy Birthday” to Breonna Taylor on what would have been her 27th birthday. Although their goal was to use something they love as a meeting ground for unity and peace, the group was still met by the New York City Police Department.

And yet, floating in the Atlantic Ocean or riding waves in Hawaii provides a kind of peaceful interlude, if only for a moment. It’s this feeling that makes water transformational for Black womxn like myself, Harvin, and Chidi.

Pro surfer Dominique Miller, who goes by Nique, is intimately familiar with the joy of escape. Often the lone Black womxn in the line-up at competitions, her presence is sometimes perplexing to both fellow competitors and spectators. For her, it’s an act of resistance.

“Surfing makes me feel completely free. And I feel really, really happy while doing it,” she says. Miller has surfed across several continents since her teenage years. That feeling, the kind that comes from being challenged and reshaped into a more confident and alive version of yourself, is why she continues to compete after five years, even as her competitors and peers remain mostly white.

The irony of Black womxn finding respite in the water despite our complicated history isn’t lost on Harvin and Miller. Both say that their parents wanted to expose them to aquatic activities early. “My mom and dad were very aware of this stigma that Black people typically don’t know how to swim, so they made sure I knew how to,” Harvin says. She first learned how to swim as a toddler at her local YMCA. Miller, too, was enrolled in swim classes before she could even walk.

Despite bearing the brunt of constant inequality, Black womxn are taking the adaptability honed in the water and using it to bolster themselves against the aggression they face on land. While my deep love and appreciation for the water didn’t develop until adulthood, it’s been no less transformational. In the last few months, as the world has become exponentially more stressful, surfing has felt even more imperative. Instead of trekking to the beach from Harlem to Queens each week, I moved across the country to be closer to water. In Los Angeles, I’ve found a community of surfers who together seek daily reprieve in the water.

After spending three decades twisting and contorting myself into a person who’s always on guard against the next racial aggression, be it macro or micro, I was desperate for something that would allow me to exist in my fullness and just be. The rush that washes over me when I glide down a glassy wave, even for a few seconds, is a sense of freedom that’s become sacred.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

For many students, recent graduates and young people in general, the COVID-19 pandemic has been incredibly stressful, especially when it comes to finances, and *particularly* when it comes to money and school. Between juggling university fees, stressing about paying off student loans and factoring in general expenses (all during a global pandemic), budgeting and financial planning are more important than ever. 

With that in mind, we spoke to two financial advisors to get the rundown on how you can benefit from federal assistance programs and manage your money this upcoming school year.  

Do I have to start paying back my student loans?

Many students rely on summer jobs and campus positions to save enough money to keep up with their student loans and university fees. Unfortunately for many students, having a job over the summer, and thus making money, was out of the question due to COVID. 

Keeping these affected students, and recent graduates, in mind, the Government of Canada suspended the Canada Student Loans and Canada Apprentice Loans deadline, moving it from March 30 to September 30. This means that students who initially would have been required to begin paying back their students loans in March won’t have to do so until September 30. (Bonus: The government extended the deadline without collecting any interest and has halted any other pre-authorized debits until this deadline). Students who will be returning to school still don’t need to worry about paying off their loans until the end of the academic year (even until six months after thanks to the grace period), while graduates or students not returning to school this year need to start paying on September 30. 

Pamela George, a financial literacy and credit counsellor and former financial aid officer at Algonquin College in Ottawa, Ont., says the most important thing students and new graduates must do when it comes to their payments is simply take action. “You need to make the minimum payment, or at least the interest, and you need to do it on time—if not, you’re going to go into default (which can affect your credit and future loans),” George says. “I’m big on not missing your payments. As a former financial aid officer, I saw so many students do exactly that and it takes so much work to get out of that cycle.” 

If you can’t make your minimum payment, read on for options!

Read this next: Everything You Need to Know About the Benefits Programs Replacing CERB

Can I receive an additional extension on my student loan payments because of COVID?

If you’re concerned that you may not be able to make your minimum loan payment in time, consider applying for the federal Repayment Assistance Plan. This plan assesses how much you can reasonably afford to pay based on your income, and depending on your situation, it can either reduce or eliminate your monthly payments for a period of six months. (Hot tip: If you’re still unsure how much you’d be qualified to receive, plug in your information into the federal Student Financial Assistance Calculator).

Still not sure if you’ll be able to make your payments even with the assistance plan? Don’t panic, because you have a few options. To start, contact the National Student Loans Service Centre (NSLSC) or your provincial loan provider to figure out the best plan to get back on track. A few options include adjusting your interest rate and reducing your monthly payment to avoid missing it entirely. If you’ve missed nine months of payments, your student loan will be automatically sent to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) for collection, which means you’ll no longer receive student aid. In order to get back on track from there, contact the CRA to get your loan up to date. 

“There are options for customizing your repayment terms; for example, paying a smaller amount over a longer time period. And there are even additional options based on individual circumstances, such as students with disabilities,” says Liz Schieck, a financial planner at the Toronto-based New School of Finance. “The most important thing is to try and make your required payments on time to avoid negatively impacting your credit score. And if you’re struggling to make those payments, don’t hesitate to call them to find out how they can help.”

Which other federal financial assistance programs am I eligible for? 

In addition to the Repayment Assistance Plan explained above, if you’re a graduate or student not returning to school this year and must start repaying your loans at the end of September, there are two few additional federal programs you can consider for additional financial assistance: 

Canada Emergency Student Benefit (CESB)

The CESB program is for post-secondary students and recent post-secondary and high school graduates who were unable to find work this summer because of the pandemic. For each four-week period, the benefit offers $2,000 for those with a disability or dependants and $1,250 for those without. It runs from May through August, but Canadians are eligible to apply until September 30. 

Canada Student Loans and Grants

If you’re looking to take out a whole new loan or grant for your schooling, make sure to check out the federal financial aid website to see what you’re qualified for, depending on your province and institution. Remember that a loan will eventually need to be paid back and will collect interest, while a grant is similar to a scholarship and does not need to be repaid. 

Due to COVID-19, the federal government doubled the maximum qualifying amount for these grants from $3,000 to $6,000 for full-time students and $1,800 to $3,600 for part-time students. 

Other changes include the weekly maximum student loan limit being bumped up from $210 to $350, and students will also no longer be required to make their fixed student and spousal contribution. 

Helpful note:

If you’re already receiving CERB or EI, you are not eligible for the CESB benefit. *But* if you find out that you’re not eligible after having already applied for the benefit or received it—don’t panic! You have to return the money you received without penalty. “If it was due to an unexpected change in your income or a simple mistake (i.e. you thought you were eligible but later found out that you weren’t), the government has said that they won’t be penalizing people and you can simply pay back any money you shouldn’t have received,” Schieck says. “Every individual’s situation is different, so if you’re in doubt you should just give Service Canada or CRA—depending on where you applied for your benefits—a call and talk it through with them.”

Read this next: What To Do If You’re Laid Off Because of the Coronavirus

I’m still in school and received CERB or CESB. Will that affect my ability to get a student loan?

One common question students have concerning these two benefits is whether receiving them could decrease their chance of qualifying for a student loan. While every situation is different, the federal government has broadened their loan eligibility criteria to make the process even more stress-free given that we’re in the middle of a pandemic. 

That said, there is still a chance that your CESB or CERB may be taken into consideration during the application process. “When you apply for student loans, you are required to report any income you’ve earned or expect to earn during the school year—this would include CESB or CERB,” Schieck says. “This income is always taken into account when government student loan issuers decide whether someone qualifies for a loan and how much they could receive.”

“But every individual is different, and income is not the only factor they consider when processing loan applications,” Schieck adds. Other factors include family income, number of dependants, credit score, debt-to-income ratio, enrolment status and academic standing. 

So, how can I make the most of my money this school year? 

With all of that in mind, there’s still a lot more that students and recent grads can do when it comes to saving money and paying down loans. One of the most important tips from financial advisors? Budget, budget, budget! If you’re receiving loans or dipping into your own savings to pay for school, make sure to sit down (preferably with someone who is money savvy, or even a professional) and plan out how much you’re earning and how much you should be spending monthly.

“What I see happen often is that students receive this large lump sum of money from their loans or grants and feel this false form of wealth and mismanage it, and before you know it, it’s gone,” George says. “Get a budget and figure out or ask someone to help you properly manage it.” Schieck even recommends having a separate account for day-to-day expenses and to give yourself a weekly or monthly allowance to stay within. “It’s really hard to look at six months’ worth of money and figure out in a moment how much you can spend at the grocery store that week!” she says. “Break it into smaller chunks so that you don’t accidentally overspend.” 

Read this next: 10 Students and Teachers On How They Feel About Going Back to School In a Pandemic

In addition to budgeting, financial advisors recommend minimizing non-essential expenses and contributing to your savings. While this pandemic may have had many obvious negative side effects, one positive one for many people has been a decrease in daily spending on things like expensive public transit, Starbucks lattes and that $20 salad. Keep that saving momentum going by minimizing extra or unnecessary expenses, in whatever way is most effective for you. A few popular budgeting apps and programs that can help keep you on track include Mint, Mylo, Pocket Guard, and lastly, your personal banking app. If available, download your bank’s app to better monitor your transactions and monthly bills.  

And finally, don’t forget about your taxes! Both the income from CESB and CERB is taxable, but these assistance programs are *not* deducting income taxes before paying you the way an actual employer would. That means you have to be aware of this and account for it come tax season. “It’s possible that students won’t end up owing much because of tuition credits and lower income for the year, but you still want to be aware that you could have a tax bill owing for 2020 when you file next year,” Schieck says. “If you’re able to save any of this money in anticipation of that tax bill, do so!”

When trying to figure out exactly how much to save, Schieck says that the benefit is added to the individual’s total income for the year and taxed accordingly, so it varies widely from person to person. She recommends seeking personalized tax advice sooner rather than later to plan ahead. 

Most importantly, if you need help, don’t shy away from asking for it. Reach out to your campus financial advisor, a student loan representative, or anyone that you usually turn to for financial guidance. There are so many resources out there to help you get back on track with your debt and get a better handle on your spending. 

Nelson Mandela famously said “sport has the power to change the world,” and that’s never been more clear than as of late. On August 26, the Milwaukee Bucks basketball team refused to take the court for Game 5 against the Orlando Magic. ICYMI (or are just not Raptors bandwagon fan, which, fair), the NBA is currently in the middle of their playoff series, which are taking place in Orlando, Florida and have required all players, coaches, training staff and necessary employees to quarantine and remain in the NBA Bubble for the duration of the season. Within the bubble—which is meant to ensure that all those involved in the league can play and participate without the risk of contracting COVID-19—the NBA was able to restart its 2019/2020 season, with games resuming on July 30 and intended to run until finals in October.

But that may be about to change. In protest of racial injustice and specifically the August 23 shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin—a Black man who was reportedly breaking up a domestic dispute—the Bucks chose to not take the court, effectively ending the game before it started.

The Milwaukee Bucks have decided to boycott Game 5, source tells ESPN.

— Adrian Wojnarowski (@wojespn) August 26, 2020

After news of their decision spread, the NBA postponed the three remaining games for the day. And then other sports organizations followed suit, with the MLB, MLS and WNBA (who have been politically engaged for *a long* time), choosing to do the same. Individually, players across the sports world chose to also withdraw from major matches. For now, many leagues in the sports world are at a standstill, and for an incredibly important reason.

So what happens next? Will the NBA resume their season? Will the NHL join the boycott and do more than their BS “moment of reflection?” Here’s everything you need to know about the current sports strike, what it means and where it could go.

Why did the Milwaukee Bucks decide to strike?

For anyone who’s been following along with sports over the past week—and the world at large over the past four months—the decision by the Milwaukee Bucks to strike didn’t come out of nowhere. The strike came on the heels of 29-year-old Jacob Blake being shot in the back seven times by police on August 23. According to Wisconsin Attorney-General Josh Kaul, officers were called to an address after a woman reported “her boyfriend was present and was not supposed to be on the premises,” per the BBC. After arriving, officers tried to arrest Blake, tasering and assaulting him. In video taken by a bystander, Blake is seen opening his car door, before a police officer grabs at his shirt and fires seven shots into his back. There are conflicting reports about whether or not Blake had a knife in his hand, but bystanders said they didn’t see one. Blake’s three children were in the car with him and according to reps for his family, Blake is now paralyzed from the waist down. In addition to this, on August 25, three people were shot by a 17-year-old white man while protesting Blake’s shooting.

It’s a horrific incident and, as we all know, a tragically common one. Blake joins an increasingly long list of Black men and women who have been killed or assaulted by law enforcement in the United States and North America. (The Bucks’ own Sterling Brown was also a victim of police brutality in 2018.) And despite the worldwide protests, nothing is changing.

Read this next: Here’s What’s Happening on Wet’suwet’en Territory Now

In response to this latest brutality, on August 25, the Toronto Raptors and Boston Celtics players met to discuss potentially boycotting Game 1 of the series, with Raptors head coach Nick Nurse saying that some players had even considered leaving the NBA bubble. In the days prior to the strike, several players within the bubble refused to answer any basketball-related questions in press conferences, instead only speaking to Blake’s shooting. Responding to a question from journalist Taylor Rook, Raptors guard Fred VanVleet spoke about the mental and emotional toll the recent shooting and ongoing violence was having on him and other players, saying: “It’s a lot to take in. I think we can’t underestimate the trauma that we take in on a daily basis from our phones and watching these videos. You watch a guy get shot in front of his entire family, and then right underneath that video is somebody saying, ‘Well, hey, he should have just listened to the police.’ You take all that in, whether you register it or not, whether you realize what you’re looking at or not. You’re taking that in.”

Fred VanVleet took no basketball questions and only spoke about Jacob Blake. He was incredibly thoughtful and visibly emotional – so I simply asked him how he’s doing. pic.twitter.com/9gSaFf4Bc4

— Taylor Rooks (@TaylorRooks) August 25, 2020

In a statement to the media on August 26, after the announcement that they would be sitting out Game 5, the Milwaukee Bucks said: “Over the last few days in our home state of Wisconsin, we’ve seen the horrendous video of Jacob Blake being shot in the back seven times by a police officer in Kenosha, and the additional shooting of protesters. Despite the overwhelming plea for change, there has been no action, so our focus today cannot be on basketball.

“When we take the court and represent Milwaukee and Wisconsin, we are expected to play at a high level, give maximum effort and hold each other accountable. We hold ourselves to that standard, and in this moment, we are demanding the same from our lawmakers and law enforcement. We are calling for justice for Jacob Blake and demand the officers be held accountable.”

Full statement from the Milwaukee Bucks: pic.twitter.com/jjGEyVcCmB

— Milwaukee Bucks (@Bucks) August 26, 2020

What happened after their announcement?

A few hours after the Bucks’ announcement, the NBA and their players association announced that they were postponing  and rescheduling the remaining games originally planned for August 26. Shortly after that, several Major League Baseball, teams including the Milwaukee Brewers and Seattle Mariners, chose to sit out their games in solidarity. This was followed by Major League Soccer, which announced they’d be postponing five matches the same day.

At the individual level, tennis star Naomi Osaka announced that she would not be taking part in an August 27 semi-finale match at the Western & Southern Open in New York. (On August 27, Osaka announced that she would in fact take part in the match, which had been rescheduled to August 28—alongside all other matches in the tournament.)

pic.twitter.com/miKzgSdGxY

— NaomiOsaka大坂なおみ (@naomiosaka) August 27, 2020

Initially, the National Hockey League—in keeping with their history of being actually terrible—only held a “moment of reflection.” On August 27, the NHL announced they’d be postponing games in solidarity with the NBA and in support of Jacob Blake.

What are the players asking for?

It’s simple: Just justice. In their statement to the media, the Milwaukee Bucks outlined that just as they are asked to go on the court and play to their highest selves and hold each other accountable, they’re asking lawmakers and law enforcement to do the same thing. “For this to occur, it is imperative for the Wisconsin State Legislature to reconvene after months of inaction and take up meaningful measures to address issues of police accountability, brutality and criminal justice reform,” they stated. The players also encouraged all American citizens to “educate themselves, take peaceful and responsible action and remember to vote on November 3.”

What does striking accomplish?

While many online and IRL are proud of these NBA, WNBA and additional players for taking a stand, a quick glance at the comments on Twitter shows that—as with anything—there are those who love to troll and say that sports shouldn’t be political (FYI, sports are and have been *incredibly* political for a long time), with certain people stating that striking won’t accomplish anything. But, with everyone talking about it online and on TV—on some of the biggest platforms in North America—it already *is* accomplishing something: conversation. As many people online pointed out, the strike was prompting necessary and unprecedented conversations on-air between news and sports casters about race relations in North America—and that’s only going to continue. “I think what was really cool is that a lot of those outlets that would have been showing the MLB games, NBA games, WNBA games and the tennis tournament really had to flip their script and focus on the Black Lives Matter movement, focus on Jacob Blake and focus on what all of these players were doing,” says Ellen Hyslop, co-founder of The Gist, a female-led sports media startup. “The players’ protest forced more airtime to be on the movement and Black Lives Matter,” she continues, “and hopefully got the message out to a lot of people who needed to hear that and realize what was going on.”

Read this next: What Is Systemic Racism?

And she thinks it’ll only be more effective in the long run—although only time will tell. “A strike like this is definitely effective,” she says. “I’m sure that we’ll see some of the social numbers and the ratings numbers come out over the next few days and weeks in terms of what different types of hashtags were trending, how often people were speaking about Jacob Blake, how often people were talking about Black Lives Matter, how often people were talking about the NBA and all their initiatives. There’s certainly an impact.”

Why is this a big deal?

Whether or not the strike will ultimately be effective in eliciting IRL change remains to be seen, but regardless what’s happening in sports right now is a pretty big freakin’ deal—for one, because it’s completely unprecedented in terms of its scale. “This is something that I’ve never seen in sports in my lifetime,” Hyslop says, noting how several leagues are participating. “You’ve never seen something that’s united so many leagues and so many players to be a part of it.”

Which isn’t to say that political movements are an anomaly in sport; far from it. Activism and politics in sport dates back into the 1950s and ’60s. In 1986, African-American runners Tommie Smith and John Carlos famously performed the Black Power salute while on the podium at the Mexico City Olympic Games, protesting the treatment of Black people in America. In 2010, The Phoenix Suns wore “Los Suns” jerseys to protest harsh immigration laws and show solidarity with Mexican migrants, and in August 2016 San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick sat during the national anthem. Sports have always been political, but this is the first time a movement has been so widespread across full teams and leagues.

Another reason this is such a big deal? It hits big organizations and networks where it hurts: the bottom line—which means that they’re probably much more likely to listen. According to a July 1 article by Reuters, setting up the NBA Bubble and re-starting the season was no small (or inexpensive) feat, costing the league over $150 million. This includes—among other costs—daily COVID tests, treatment and quarantine associated with positive tests, meals, security, transportation, sanitation of facilities including practice gyms, and staging of games at multiple stadium sites. Per Reuters, by playing games without fans present, the NBA projected a loss exceeding $1 billion in revenue related to ticket sales. In this scenario, the NBA, advertisers and TV stations need money—and basketball players and games are their capital. As the New York Times points out, the playoffs are “disproportionately valuable” for TV stations compared with regular season games, and cancelling the playoffs would have a huge financial effect.

As Jack Hamilton so powerfully wrote in an August 27 article for Slate, this is a labour strike “undertaken by some of the most famous athletes on the planet for political purposes, a refusal to perform their craft for a country so resistant to adequately addressing racism and anti-Black violence.”

And what should we call it?

Which brings us to the next question: Is this actually a labour strike or a boycott?

While initially, NBA players were referring to their decision as a “boycott,” several people—including U.S Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez–have noted that it’s indeed a strike, as the players are withholding their labour without asking for money.

NBA players are courageously on strike (withholding labor), NOT boycotting (withholding their $ /purchase). The diff is important bc it shows their power as *workers.*

The courage this takes is profound. WNBA organizing in this moment MUST be recognized too. #StrikeForBlackLives https://t.co/QfsJAHLVLx

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) August 27, 2020

Per the LA Times, what’s happening right now is technically coined a “wildcat strike,” because “despite [LeBron] James and other players referring to the actions as boycotts, the traditional definition of the term revolves around an organized effort to hurt an entity financially in order to drive change or attract attention. That doesn’t fit this situation. The players aren’t trying to damage their employers—or affiliated entities like sponsors or television networks—but instead want to draw attention to the Blake shooting and social injustice.”

It’s an important distinction, because as AOC tweeted, it not only shows the player’s power as workers, but also emphasizes the fact that this movement is purely in service of justice—and not for any other agenda or attention.

So, why did this start with basketball players?

While the strike and call for accountability is now spreading throughout the sports world, there’s no overlooking the fact that it began with professional basketball players who chose to not just “shut up and dribble,” like they’ve been told, but rather not dribble and speak out. As Refinery29 Canada writer Kathleen Newman-Bremang pointed out in a tweet thread, it’s the players themselves that have initiated this, not the NBA.

I already know newsrooms are going to fuck up reporting this just like they did with Kap. These athletes are striking in protest of police brutality and anti-black racism. The players did this, not the NBA. Like black lives, words matter.

— Kathleen Newman-Bremang (@KathleenNB) August 27, 2020

So we should give them credit, especially because players in the NBA and WNBA have been speaking out on these issues for a long time now, a factor that makes the strike stemming from this organization—and specific sport—not so surprising. “The NBA and the WNBA, and I think basketball as just a sport, is so much more in tune with culture and what’s happening and what’s happening at its roots,” Hyslop says. “When you look at both the NBA as well as the WNBA, they have the largest Black population of athletes in comparison to other major leagues, which I think is very important in something like this and why they’re leading the charge.” And while this movement is on the shoulders of the players themselves, another reason they are able to do this work is in part due to the support of the leagues in them speaking out. Hyslop points to the NFL and their blackballing of football player Colin Kaepernick for kneeling during the national anthem (something he did four years to the day of the Bucks’ strike). “It’s completely different with the NBA and the WNBA,” she says. “The commissioners are completely supportive of having ‘Black Lives Matter’ on the court, having ‘Black Lives Matter’ on their jerseys [and] having messages of support on the backs of their jerseys. So I think it’s the combination of the players doing all these amazing things and speaking out and being so tied to culture and representing the Black community and population; but then it’s also feeling so safe and secure and supported by the league.”

Read this next: Bianca Andreescu Is Our Ultimate Icon of Women Helping Women

Will the NBA and other organizations resume play?

When the NBA and other leagues resume—or whether or not they decide to resume at all—still remains to be seen. On August 26, NBA players held a meeting to decide whether or not to continue with the season. Interestingly, the LA Lakers and Clippers were the only teams who voted to not resume the season.

Sources: The Lakers and Clippers have voted to boycott the NBA season. Most other teams voted to continue. LeBron James has exited the meeting.

— Shams Charania (@ShamsCharania) August 27, 2020

On August 27, the NBA released a statement saying they are hopeful games will resume on the following day and the Toronto Raptor’s announced that Game 1 against the Boston Celtics—scheduled for later that day—was postponed.

Regardless of what happens next, there’s no denying that change is needed, and athletes (along with many in the rest of the world) are fed up. “I think it signifies that change is needed, and I think that it signifies that all of these teams and players are sick and tired of being sick and tired,” Hyslop says of the strike, referring to similar comments made by TSN journalist Kayla Grey. “And I think that the timing of what they’re doing is also really important, especially considering that there’s some major votes coming up that are statewide and local, and then there’s also a major national election coming up. And so everything that’s happening now is also encouraging a lot of people to vote at the local and regional levels as well as at the national levels. And, I think that everything that they’re doing is just trying to spark change and change in the right direction—and saying that enough is enough.”

So, let’s get justice for Jacob Blake and let’s get justice for Breonna Taylor—because it’s long overdue.

On August 25, the Republican National Convention kicked off its second evening of endorsements for President Donald Trump with (debatably accurate) speeches from the current president’s colleagues, constituents and family members. This includes remarks from his third and current wife Melania Trump who gave a lengthy speech in the White House Rose Garden. While there was much debate online over the meaning behind the First Lady’s outfit, the sincerity of her words and whether or not she should have given a speech at all, one thing remained clear: the world loves to talk about the FLOTUS. Unfortunately, that includes talking about her body and what she chooses to do with it. While speaking with MSNBC on the morning of August 25, White House advisor Peter Navarro compared the current First Lady to *another* much-discussed FLOTUS: Jackie Kennedy. “Melania Trump will be introducing the new Rose Garden, I find her to be the Jackie Kennedy of her time—the beauty, the elegance, the soft-spokenness,” Navarro told MSNBC. “I think she’ll deliver a powerful message to the American people.”

It’s a comparison that—to put it mildly—didn’t sit well with many viewers. Twitter reactions were immediate with people tweeting that it was inaccurate for myriad reasons. Some pointed out the more apparent differences between the two women: Kennedy was a journalist, Trump was a model; Kennedy came a family that was like American royalty, Trump is an immigrant who came to the states in pursuit of the American dream; Kennedy’s husband was widely adored, Trump’s husband is…not. Others were quick to shame the current First Lady for her career as a model, and past participation in risqué photoshoots, with some online going so far as to say that Trump has starred in porn and hangs out with adult entertainers—claims that are, by all accounts, false. Writer Tomi T. Ahonen even called her a “Slovenian Hooker”.

Read this next: What Trump’s ‘Not My Type’ Defense Says About Rape Allegations In America

One Twitter user shared side-by-side photos of Kennedy and Trump—in which Trump is wearing a very low-cut bodysuit (like below her naval low) and Kennedy is in a high-necked, gingham sundress—writing: “Peter Navarro just told Andrea Mitchell Melania Trumps is the Jackie Kennedy of our time…yeah I can totally see the similarities.”

Peter Navarro just told Andrea Mitchell Melania Trump is the Jackie Kennedy of our time…yeah I can totally see the similarities pic.twitter.com/cjekdUJ0x4

— Icculus The Brave (@FirenzeMike) August 25, 2020

The insinuation is pretty clear: some people are implying that the current First Lady is *nothing* like Kennedy because she dresses a certain way and has been overtly sexy in the past. And it’s pretty clear that the further insinuation is that a) Trump should be ashamed of having shown her body in this way and b) doing so somehow discredits her from being someone people should admire and take seriously.

And whether or not you’re a fan of Trump and her husband, that kind of mentality when it comes to women doesn’t fly. Here’s why.

Criticizing Melania Trump for what she does with her body is misogynistic

One of the main issues with the criticisms comparing Melania Trump to Jackie Kennedy is that not only does it pit two women against each other, but it places one as acceptable (Kennedy) and above the other (Trump). Implicit in these criticisms of Trump and subtle jabs at how she presents herself physically–whether that’s through the more revealing clothes she used to wear pre-White House or the degree to which she has chosen to show off her body in photo shoots—is the notion that it’s wrong; and more broadly, that her being sexual with her body is wrong.

Read this next: Can Men Please Stop Mansplaining How Vaginas Work?

Which, to be clear, it’s not. Saying that a woman like Trump being sexy is wrong, thus diminishing Trump’s value down to her body—and trying to dictate how she, and by extension all women, *should* present their bodies, is misogynistic and controlling. (Misogyny has historically referred to both the individual and systemic hatred of women, but not also encompasses the control and punishment of women who challenge male dominance and the status quo.) As writer Franchesca Ramsay tweeted: “A woman has the right to do whatever she wants with her body even if she’s a bigot.”

I hate shit like this mainly bc now I have to defend Melania. A woman has the right to do whatever she wants with her body even if she’s a bigot. There’s so many legit criticisms of Melania that have nothing to do with her body & stooping so low is misogynist https://t.co/nt2NtuZ7iS

— Franchesca Ramsey (@chescaleigh) August 26, 2020

Remember when people on the internet slut-shamed Kendall Jenner for having an active dating life, implying that she was being passed around by NBA players and completely erasing her autonomy and ability to choose her sexual partners? Yeah, same energy.

they act like i’m not in full control of where i throw this cooch https://t.co/DOCPKMdW6K

— Kendall (@KendallJenner) April 29, 2020

Both the jabs at Trump and Jenner are rooted in misogyny. Because heaven forbid a woman choose to be a sexual being. (See also: Ben Shapiro and the controversy around Cardi B and Meg Thee Stallion’s “WAP”.)

Not to mention kind of hypocritical

In addition to being misogynistic, criticisms of what Trump chooses to do with her body are actually hypocritical, especially if the critics are people who are also for a woman’s right to choose what she does with and to her body (which TBH, we should all be on board with). Access to reproductive healthcare and a woman’s right to choose whether or not to use contraception or continue with a pregnancy should not be up for discussion or debate—full stop. And in the same vein, what a woman chooses to do outside her body (like the clothes she puts on it), and with it (like whether she wants to pose for a sexy photo shoot) shouldn’t be up for debate in the same way. While there are obviously differences between a government restricting women’s reproductive rights and people on the internet shaming women for what they wear, both are related to a need to control women and their bodies. The through line is that it’s ultimately up to the individual to make the best decision for themselves—and anyone else’s opinion doesn’t and shouldn’t matter. We shouldn’t tell a woman what to do with her reproductive health, so why would we tell her what to do with the rest of her body?

Read this next: Kylie Jenner’s Sassy Tweet Is the Advice We Need Right Now

And ultimately, these criticisms are not productive—because there are legit things to criticize her for

Misogyny and hypocrisy aside, the real reason we shouldn’t be criticizing or shaming Trump for how she dresses or how sexy she used to be in photo shoots is because there are *many* more legitimate political things to hold her accountable for—you know, events and policy-related issues that actually affect U.S. citizens and can have a potentially dangerous effect.

Because there is a lot to unpack and be upset about. While Trump touched on racism in the country in her RNC speech, (obviously) omitted was the fact that not only has her husband spewed racially divisive rhetoric, but she herself has supported it. During President Barack Obama’s presidency, Donald Trump repeatedly publicly called for the former president to release and legitimize his Hawaiian birth certificate. The reasoning being that because Obama was Black (and the first Black president of the United States), his citizenship should be questioned because he must be from outside of the country. You know, because by this logic, only a white person can actually be an American citizen (despite the fact that Trump’s wife herself is white and was not born in the United States). It was an outrageous conspiracy theory and a claim rooted *deeply* in racism. And the First Lady supported it. In a 2011 interview on The Joy Behar Show, Trump called to see his birth certificate herself, telling the host: “It’s not only Donald who wants to see [Obama’s birth certificate], it’s the American people who voted for him and who didn’t vote for him. They want to see that.” When Trump was pressed on the subject, per Teen Vogue, with Behar telling the first lady that his birth certificate was on the internet, she said both she and her husband felt there was another birth certificate (a.k.a. the public one was fake).

Every story about Melania Trump’s speech last night should include her public support for her husband’s racist claims about Barack Obama’s birth certificate. She has never apologized. Racism is not a passing fancy or rare misstep. It is the festering core of this presidency.

— Connie Schultz (@ConnieSchultz) August 26, 2020

In 2017, when this clip re-emerged on the internet, many people online used it as an example of why the “Free Melania” movement—a joke that the FLOTUS was trapped in her marriage to President Donald Trump—was toxic; because she is entirely complicit in his actions, as well as autonomous in making her own.

In addition to her support of birtherism, Trump has also made some questionable and problematic decisions during her time in the White House. In June 2018, in the middle of the family separation crisis championed by her husband’s administration, Trump boarded a plane to visit a Texas-based detainment camp centre wearing a jacket with the words: “I Really Don’t Care, Do U?” emblazoned across the back. While the argument could be made that it was a poorly made fashion decision—maybe she grabbed the jacket on her way out the door?—first ladies are known for making statements with the clothing and designers they choose to wear. Nothing is accidental.

I don’t give AF that Melania posed nude. I don’t care that she married a mobster. I don’t care that she stayed with a man who cheated on her with a porn star. I care that she is praised by news media bc she seemed nice when she lied about who Trump is.

This is who she is. 👇 pic.twitter.com/ufj6wmbK9Z

— Kimberley Radical Leftist Johnson (@AuthorKimberley) August 26, 2020

Which means that her decision to wear a not-so-subtle “Fuck You” to the media on her jacket while on route to visit children separated from their parents and imprisoned in what have been called “mass concentration camps” is pretty reprehensible.

And if all of that isn’t enough to get you riled up, how about the fact that she has stood by a man who’s been accused of sexual misconduct and assault by at least 24 women?

So, when it comes to measuring her effectiveness as a first lady and critiquing Mrs. Trump, let’s think less about her body and sexuality and more about the policies she supports and what she’s actually accomplished during her time in the White House.

How about this. Instead of talking about the tone or the way Melania did her speech last night, name one meaningful thing she accomplished since 2016?

— Tony Posnanski (@tonyposnanski) August 26, 2020

There’s never a dull moment in the White House. On August 23, counsellor Kellyanne Conway announced that she will be resigning from her position in the Trump administration at the end of the month. In a statement released on her social media accounts, Conway explained her decision, writing: “I will be transitioning from the White House at the end of this month. George is also making changes. We disagree about plenty but we are united on what matters most: the kids. Our four children are teens and ‘tweens starting a new academic year, in middle school and high school, remotely from home for at least a few months. As millions of parents nationwide know, kids ‘doing school from home’ requires a level of attention and vigilance that is as unusual as these times.”

I’m Leaving the White House. Gratefully & Humbly.

Here is my statement:https://t.co/MpYxVfrY2N

God Bless You All.

— Kellyanne Conway (@KellyannePolls) August 24, 2020

Conway wrote that she was leaving her position “gratefully & humbly.”

“This is completely my choice and my voice. In time, I will announce future plans,” she continued. “For now, and for my beloved children, it will be less drama, more mama.” Conway was set to speak during the Republican National Convention; there has been no word if that has changed given her resignation. Her announcement came only minutes after the advisor’s husband—George Conway, a lawyer who is very publicly anti-Trump—announced that he’d be withdrawing from the Lincoln Project—a group formed by anti-Trump Republicans—to “devote more time to family matters.”

The announcement from Kellyanne Conway is big for many reasons, paramount among them the fact that the advisor has been one of the current president’s most vocal and staunch supporters and defenders, working with him since 2016 and becoming the first female campaign manager to win a presidential race, per CNN. But it’s also significant for another reason: It very well may have been influenced by her teenage daughter. On August 22, Conway’s 15-year-old daughter Claudia tweeted that she wants to formally emancipate from her parents, an announcement that comes after months of her publicly speaking out against her mom, President Trump and the Republican party on social media—specifically on TikTok and Twitter.

i’m officially pushing for emancipation. buckle up because this is probably going to be public one way or another, unfortunately. welcome to my life

— CLAUDIA CONWAY (@claudiamconwayy) August 23, 2020

But there’s *a lot* more to the story. Here, everything we know about Claudia Conway’s emancipation announcement, Kellyanne Conway’s resignation and what TikTok has to do with all of this.

Kellyanne Conway’s departure comes on the heels of some serious allegations

A day after tweeting about her intention to seek emancipation (i.e. ending the legal authority a parent has over a child under the age of 18), and just before her mom announced her resignation from the White House, Claudia Conway responded to commenters on social media speculating her motivation was due to her mom’s job and their political differences, revealing that she is in fact seeking emancipation due to what she describes as “years of childhood trauma and abuse.”

y’all love to twist everything 😭😭 i’m not getting emancipated because of my mom’s job.. it is because of years of childhood trauma and abuse

— CLAUDIA CONWAY (@claudiamconwayy) August 23, 2020

In a TikTok livestream released shortly after her mom’s announcement, Conway elaborated on these allegations, stating: “My dad doesn’t care about me, he’s never cared about me. He probably doesn’t even know my middle name—which is really sad, but true.”

Claudia is live on TikTok and just said that her parents were going to get divorced but they won’t now because they want to keep her from getting emancipated. Says that dad doesn’t care about her or even know her middle name. Says mom has been physically abusive her whole life.

— Molly McAleer (@molls) August 24, 2020

Later, she said that her dad had physically abused her when she was younger, “right here in this very room,” then went on to talk about her mom, saying: “Same thing with my mom. My mom got me arrested, she’s very, very physically abusive. Very, very verbally abusive. I’ve been belittled and badgered my entire life.”

This is the “he probably doesn’t even know my middle name” and accusations of physical abuse clip (the live booted people off throughout it and since this is what I referenced in my original tweet I wanted to include it): https://t.co/osAHdBdaie

— Molly McAleer (@molls) August 24, 2020

Kellyanne and George Conway have yet to address these claims directly.

Read this next: Trump’s Been Impeached—So Now What?

But this is not the first time Conway has made claims of abuse against her parents. In an August 6 TikTok Live, the teen made similar allegations, prompting one Twitter user to write: “Claudia Conway just went live on tiktok and talked about how her mother has physically and emotionally abused her for years and had her arrested for fake assault charges a few weeks ago…….someone get this girl emancipated STAT.”

claudia conway just went live on tiktok and talked about how her mother has physically and emotionally abused her for years and had her arrested for fake assault charges a few weeks ago…….someone get this girl emancipated STAT

— edgar allan poe dameron (@juliananannana) August 6, 2020

And later the same day, Conway seemed to be pursuing action, asking her Twitter followers, “how do i get in touch with pro bono lawyers.”

how do i get in touch with pro bono lawyers

— CLAUDIA CONWAY (@claudiamconwayy) August 6, 2020

While these allegations of abuse are unsettling, anyone who’s been following Claudia Conway on social media shouldn’t be surprised—because she has been publicly speaking out against her parents for several months. In June of this year, the TikTok star popped up on social media with several videos that made clear her political stance: liberal AF. In a series of videos, the teen has showed her support for the Black Lives Matter movement and defunding the police, called for justice in the murder of Breonna Taylor and called out Trump supporters for spreading hate on her page and spewing hate at her.

She has also called out her mom and her politics *numerous* times; making it very clear that they don’t share the same values.

@datjerseygirl♬ Bulletproof – La Roux

Most recently, after the announcement that Kellyanne would be speaking at the RNC, Claudia shared her disappointment on TikTok. (FYI, she hated it.)

@datjerseygirl♬ original sound – jennsuniverse

While some of these videos can be interpreted as a typical teen rebelling against her parents, dismissing them as such is irresponsible in light of the more serious allegations that have now come to light—including a post from early August where Claudia describes how Kellyanne had her daughter arrested for fake assault charges.

Whether or not Conway was *actually* arrested, it’s pretty clear that there is some major strife happening within this family due at least in part to Claudia’s public political activism. For example, in mid-July, Conway’s followers noticed that several of her politically-themed videos had been deleted, and then Conway revealed in a July 12 video that her parents—her dad specifically—made her delete them.

@datjerseygirlReply to @diana_loi ##voiceeffects

♬ original sound – claudiamconway

In a series of now-deleted tweets, Conway claimed that her parents were trying to “silence” her.

Some people aren’t buying Claudia Conway’s allegations—but it’s important to believe her

While many online commenters have responded with sympathy to Conway’s apparent plight as a young woman growing up in what appears to be a mentally toxic environment—others speculated that Kellyanne and the entire Conway family could be in on the schtick. As several people on Twitter theorized, perhaps Conway’s political activism against her mom’s employer, her comments online and Kellyanne’s resignation to spend more time with her family, were part of one big plot so that the political advisor could bow out of Trump’s administration before shit really hit the fan with the upcoming election. But we don’t buy this one either: With with how steadfastly Kellyanne has supported Trump through sexual assault allegations, an impeachment and WWIII, it seems pretty unlikely she’d jump ship over a potential lost election. Let’s be honest, the shit hit the fan a long time ago.

Con theory time:
Over these last few months the whole family has ramped up the drama so she could make a semi clean break from this burning trash heap. If Trump gets re-elected she’ll be able to come back. If not, she’s partially restored herself as a “mother” and can work stuff

— A Single Black Female Nerd #BLM #BTLM (@ASingleBlackFe2) August 24, 2020

Read this next: The Most Explosive Claims From Mary Trump’s New Book

Regardless of the internet’s theories about what’s really going on in the Conway household, it’s important not to dismiss or diminish Claudia’s claims. Regardless of whether there is validity to the abuse allegations, it’s extremely clear that whatever their relationship is, it’s fractured and seemingly toxic. Getting along with your parents can be difficult at the best of times, but for a 15-year-old growing up in a household at odds with a parent who has unwavering support for a man accused of rape, sexual assault and harrassment by more than 20 women, and doesn’t believe in a woman’s right to control her own body—that is beyond your typical challenging relationship. And then imagine having to publicly defend yourself against your parents’ controversial beliefs.

Unpopular opinion: Claudia isn’t the hero we need. She’s a fucking kid. I feel terrible that she has such a toxic relationship with her parents Kellyanne and George Conway. I hope they find peace.

— Angela Belcamino (@AngelaBelcamino) August 24, 2020

It’s too much for any 15-year-old to deal with. And then you add on allegations of abuse. Too often, young women (not to mention members of the LGBTQ+ community) aren’t believed when it comes to sharing their experiences with abuse. Which is why people who are skeptical about Conway’s statements—characterizing her emancipation declaration as the temperamental musings of a “rich white girl who’s rebelling against her parents”—may want to have a hard think.

And all of you with your poor Claudia Conway dissertations; she’s a rich white girl who’s rebelling against her parents; she doesn’t need your pity; she’ll be Megan McCain in 10-15 years, hopefully with more brains and a better wig! 🙄🙄🙄🙄

— Corey Bu-Shea (@coreybking) August 24, 2020

Jumping to the conclusion that is simply rebelling based on the fact that she comes from a privileged family isn’t only unfair, but it also dismisses and invalidates both Conway’s reported experience as well as those of other victims of abuse. If a wealthy white teen isn’t believed, then what message does that send BIPOC and less advantaged survivors of abuse?

hot take: saying that Claudia Conway is just a spoiled teenager from a wealthy family rebelling against her parents invalidates victims of abuse. you don’t know what goes on behind closed doors in families like that.

— ainsley brown (@AinsleyBBrown) August 24, 2020

While there’s no doubt that being from a certain socioeconomic group as well as being white or non-marginalized affords people a lot of  privileges (see: legit everything), it doesn’t afford protection from abuse. If Paris Hilton’s recent revelations of physical and mental abuse at the hands of teachers have shown us anything, it’s that young people experience abuse in many different ways.

We should also acknowledge how monumental TikTok activism is in this

Legitimacy debates aside, if anything else Kellyanne Conway’s resignation is big news for the fact that it pretty much stemmed directly from social media-based activism. The fact remains that—through the power of TikTok—Conway spread her message, gained a following and elicited IRL change. The 15-year-old, albeit indirectly, brought forth a change that politically engaged liberals have been trying to do since Trump’s election in 2016—all via TikTok.

It’s a change that proves that not only should we *not* discount Gen Z and the power of their activism, but we also shouldn’t discount their means of spreading and eliciting change (ie: via social media). Because it actually gets the job done. (Also, isn’t it nice to think of TikTok as an agent of social activism rather than *just* a place for dancing videos and content houses to thrive?).

Read this next: This Is Why WW3 Is Trending

Online or IRL, something tells us this won’t be the last we hear about Claudia Conway.

George Floyd was murdered on May 25. The video of his killing by police, taken by courageous 17-year-old Darnella Frazier, sparked demands for justice far beyond the streets of Minneapolis. By May 30, Americans were protesting police brutality and systemic injustice in every state in the union. Unfortunately, there has been a steady stream of unarmed Black people killed by white people, but this particular moment—and the persistent protests—refused to quietly drop out of the public eye.

That weekend, my promotions tab in my Gmail swelled with companies—from Twitter and Netflix to Baublebar and Whole30—making direct statements about racial inequality. Because companies generally maintain political neutrality so as not to alienate their consumers, I was taken aback by this deluge of support for Black lives. My suspicion that this moment was different was confirmed when my friends’ companies started actually facilitating discussions about race, a topic all but forbidden to openly discuss at work before Floyd’s death.

I participated in some of these fragile conversations. I knew racism wouldn’t be solved with these discussions, but I wasn’t prepared for the realization that the wall of white privilege is so high that a lot of white people were only now becoming aware of the systemic injustices that have shaped everything about this country for hundreds of years. And naively, my Black friends and I had not anticipated so much ignorance around the idea of intersectionality. During one memorable discussion, a white woman, in an attempt to empathize with our modern day oppression, offered a spirited, “I’m a woman in the workplace, so I know how it feels!” As a Black woman, I was grateful my laptop camera was turned off.

When I shared that white woman’s reaction with Meredith Dawson, a television and film writer, she said, “The word ‘intersectionality’ comes to mind.”

“As a Black woman, I have to fight being a woman and Black and then I have to fight being a Black woman,” she said. “It’s layers that I think white women don’t seem to understand. To use improv, it’s like, ‘yes your problem and another problem!’”

Black women in the workplace constantly contend with the pressure to repackage ourselves into something perceived as less problematic, starting with our appearances. Black women have long been viewed as hyper-sexual, and research has shown black women are more likely than white women to be sexually objectified and dehumanized.

Ariel Belgrave, a health and fitness coach who owns Gym Hooky, told ELLE.com that she spent years worried about how she presented herself to her white colleagues. Before becoming one of the most prominent Black fitness instructors on social media, Belgrave worked in finance and tech.

“I went through a crisis with just watering down my blackness in the way I looked. What I wore mattered,” she said. “I’m someone who’s blessed in the rear, so I have to be conscious. There were things I’d see white women wear and think, I’d never be able to wear that in a million years! If I wore that, I’d be this hyper-sexualized creature. That’s something a white woman doesn’t have to worry about.”

No matter the industry or income level, Black women also have to monitor how their demeanor is being perceived.

“I’m hyper-aware of how I talk to people, the words I’m using, how I articulate certain things,” said Vivianne Castillo, a user experience researcher with a background in human services and counseling. “I’m very aware that I need to present myself in a way that’s approachable, that makes the white people in the room think I’m friendly, that I’m easy to talk to, that I’m relatable.”

Still, I’ve often heard my white woman coworkers lament the fact that they must be careful not to come across as “bossy.” While all women can be targeted with sexist discrimination rooted in patriarchy, the stakes for Black women have always been much higher. “It’s important for white people to know that I can bring a challenging point of view, but that I won’t make you too uncomfortable,” Castillo also said.

In tech fields, which often hold themselves out as leading the push for progressive workplace values, bosses often tell employees to bring their full selves to work, which only complicates matters for Black women. We’ve already contorted ourselves into more palatable, corporate America-ready versions of who we are, so which “full self” should we present? I know that my full self includes my Black self, not just the professional veneer I’m forced to put on during work hours.

“This whole ‘bring your full self to work’ thing doesn’t actually apply to you if you’re in a workplace culture that upholds and advances whiteness and white supremacy,” Castillo said. Considering that most businesses are white-owned, Black women must continue calibrating how much, if any, of their “real selves” they can safely reveal at work.

Forcing Black women to assimilate to largely white workplaces takes a real cumulative toll on each of us. And while standards are gradually changing, Black women are still expected to conform in ways like straightening our hair, being excessively pleasant, and abandoning language that sounds “too Black.”

“It’s draining. It’s tiring. It’s sad that it’s become the norm for the community,” said Belgrave. “I was almost groomed this way. But it’s taxing.” White women do not have to consider creative ways to make their whiteness more palatable for minimal acceptance in the workplace, and they don’t have to bear the physical and emotional burdens of doing so.

While Black women navigate this dizzying workplace culture steeped in white supremacist standards on a daily basis, white women also benefit handsomely from white supremacist workplace structures. “We have to work twice as hard for half as much” was not just a memorable scene from Scandal—it is the lived Black experience, especially for Black women. Dawson’s white peers have often remarked on how much more she writes than they do. “I’m constantly writing. People say ‘she’s always writing,’ but she has to be,” Dawson said. “I’m constantly juggling a movie here, developing something, in order to get the ball moving. I personally want an empire, and you don’t get that by just writing one pilot every two years.” Aspiring white writers have the luxury to create at a normal pace, a luxury that evades Black writers like Dawson.

Castillo echoed that sentiment.“I not only have to crush it, but I also need to develop strong relationships with people who have influence and sway,” she said . “And someone who can uplift the great work that I’m doing.” This might sound like mentorship, but the grueling subtly is that often, if Black women don’t develop these strong relationships with influential people, our hard work can go unacknowledged, further perpetuating barriers to leadership roles and the compensation we deserve.”

While Black women are forced to navigate these overlapping oppressions, they also have to reconcile with the feeling that their failure or success is a reflection on all Black people.

“It’d become the norm for me to be the only,” Belgrave said about being the lone Black person in white spaces. “The only one on the team, the only one in the meeting… it’s almost like I’m the representation for all Black women.” So few Black people are hired in corporate America that all of our actions are exhaustively scrutinized. From entry-level positions to the few leadership roles earned by Black women, we consider our entire race in almost every professional decision we make.

And still, Black women are determined to thrive.

One of the ways we’re changing our own narrative is by creating opportunities for Black women coming behind us. “You have people like Ava [DuVernay], Lena [Waithe], and Issa [Rae] who are creating jobs for people and bringing more people of color to the forefront of media so that they can do their own thing,” Dawson said.

Our ability to defy unbelievable odds also comes in part from us creating positive spaces for ourselves. “Things that have made the journey easier, and things that I wish I’d received more advice on earlier in my career, is to develop a community of other Black corporate professionals, being able to learn from each other throughout the highs and the lows,” Castillo said. “Honestly, the anchor that I would put it in is the importance of just having that mental and emotional support.”

Commiseration by way of community is a beautiful salve for the unique challenges Black women face in the workplace. I’ve greatly benefited from community within my profession. While I believe our ability to mobilize and support one another speaks to our strength and compassion for each other, I wish we didn’t need that extra support. I wish systems that work for white people could work for everyone.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io