Wu Zetian and “Bloody Mary”: Examining History’s Most Demonized Female Leaders

By: Oliva Hom and Julia Price, 2021 Summer Collaborators at Power in Place

It’s a sad reality that in this patriarchal world, female leaders face far more criticism when compared to their male counterparts. In addition to shouldering the standard challenges of the political world, female politicians must also deal with constant scrutiny of everything from their speech patterns to their clothing choices. And historically, this trend is not new. Female leaders have been unfairly criticized–often to the point of demonization–for thousands of years. It is far too often that history’s most powerful female leaders appear in textbooks not as complex women, but rather as conniving, bloodthirsty villains. Of course, there’s no way of knowing for sure what these women were like; perhaps they were as evil as history tells us. Nevertheless, it’s just as likely that many powerful women of centuries past have had their legacies incredibly distorted by the misogynistic historians of their era. If we attempt to dig through the sexist propaganda that surrounds their legacies, as many modern historians are beginning to do, we can have much more nuanced discussions about these leaders. In this post, we will examine two of the most reviled female leaders in history: Wu Zetian, China’s first female emperor, and “Bloody Mary,” England’s first queen. 

Wu Zetian

Image taken from An 18th century album of portraits of 86 emperors of China, with Chinese historical notes. Originally published/produced in China, 18th century. (British Library, shelfmark Or. 2231)

Image taken from An 18th century album of portraits of 86 emperors of China, with Chinese historical notes. Originally published/produced in China, 18th century. (British Library, shelfmark Or. 2231)

Empress Wu was born in 624 CE in Wenshui (now part of Shanxi province) and died in 705 CE. Her actual reign lasted from 690-705 CE, but she effectively ruled the country from 660 CE onward. Wu was the only woman to rule China in her own right. However, her reign is anything but celebrated. 

Chinese history paints Empress Wu as a demonic woman who connived her way to power through murder and deceit. In fact, historians at the time claimed that she “killed her sister, butchered her elder brothers, murdered the ruler, [and] poisoned her mother. She is hated by gods and men alike” (Dash). Historians also highlighted Wu’s scandalous personal life, portraying her as sexually promiscuous because her second husband (Emperor Gaozong) was her stepson, and she also had relationships with younger men in her later years. 

It is true that in her ascent to power, Wu mercilessly eliminated her direct competition, Empress Wang, and Lady Xiao (another concubine of Gaozong). Apparently “Wu killed her own infant daughter and blamed the murder on Empress Wang. Gaozong believed this and soon dismissed his empress and promoted Wu [Zhao] to the position; she immediately put Wang and Xiao to death and exiled their relatives and supporters” (Lee). Wu was made empress in 655 CE. By 660, Emperor Gaozong’s health was declining, so Wu became the true ruler of China. After Gaozong’s death in 683, she ruled on the behalf of her sons, who were essentially puppet rulers. Eventually in 690, when Wu was 65 years old, she seized the throne for herself. She proclaimed herself emperor, and created her own dynasty, the Zhou Dynasty (690-705 CE). 

As empress, Wu was ruthless but effective, and the Tang Dynasty prospered under her rule, becoming one of China’s golden ages. Some of her innovations included introducing a civil service exam system based on merit (instead of nepotism), listening to the complaints of ministers and civilians, “publishing (albeit as part of her own legitimation campaign) Biographies of Famous Women and requiring children to mourn both parents, rather than merely their father” (Dash), reforming the military, improving the agriculture system, and waging successful wars to expand the empire. 

Wu’s reign came to an end in a coup in 704. Members of her court forced her to yield power to her exiled son, Zhongzong. Wu was in poor health, and died in 705. Her memorial tablet, which she had commissioned when she was empress, was left purposefully blank so future historians could compose an epitaph detailing her accomplishments. 

But over a thousand years later, it still remains blank, her legacy unwritten. Despite her accomplishments, historians of her era resisted any venerations to the country’s first female leader. It is due to sexism that historians criticized her, which could have resulted in over exaggerated accounts of her actions. The double standard here is very clear. Yes, Empress Wu might’ve been a murderer or ordered the murders of others, but that’s typical for Chinese emperors, and for most male rulers in history. Wu’s ambition is only looked down upon because she was a woman who went against traditional Confucian values, which emphasized women’s subservience to men. Meanwhile, ambitious men are praised for their masculinity. This is not to excuse what Wu did but to examine the expectations of rulers that affected her. Rulers have to consolidate power by eliminating their opposition, and that’s what Empress Wu did. She did everything men did, except as a woman. 

How should we remember Wu Zetian? Should we vilify her, praise her? The answer lies in the nuance of her life. We should do possibly the most difficult thing of all, analyze her by taking into account what it means to be not just a woman in ancient China, but the first woman to rule China as an emperor. 

“Bloody Mary”

Portrait by Antonis Mor, 1554

Portrait by Antonis Mor, 1554

Mary I of England–or, how she is popularly known, “Bloody Mary”–ruled England from 1553-1558. Like Wu Zetian, she was the first Queen to rule her country in her own right. 

No other English rulers carry such a scathing title. Her own father, King Henry VIII–best known for being a ruthless and erratic tyrant who, among other atrocities, beheaded two of his own wives–had the hardly devastating epithet of “coppernose,” apparently due to his cheap currency (Barksdale). So how justified is Queen Mary I’s epithet? Was she really far bloodier than her counterparts?

It’s undeniable that Queen Mary I did authorize violence. For instance, she famously burned 258 protestants at the stake as part of her effort to reinstate Catholicism in England (Solly). That being said, religious persecution was not unique to Mary’s short reign. While the Catholic Mary indisputably burned protestants, her Protestant half-siblings Edward VI and Elizabeth I authorized the deaths of more than 6,000 Catholic rebels during their own Protestant reigns (Solly). The Tudor era was fundamentally one of extreme religious upheaval and violence. 

Mary I also did far more than simply burn protestants. Although she only reigned for five years, she initiated the “financial reform, exploration and naval expansion...that would be built upon by her much lauded-successor, Elizabeth I” (Solly). In addition to being an effective ruler, her journey to becoming England’s first Queen is remarkable; she certainly defied the odds. Perhaps it would be more accurate to remember her as “Mary the Defiant.” For example, When King Henry VIII divorced Mary’s mother Catherine of Aragon, he immediately declared Mary illegitimate, removed her title of princess, and attempted to force Mary into a convent (Simons). However, the headstrong Mary never retreated into exile, and stubbornly remained at court to fight for her right to rule. Later, after her half-brother King Edward VI died, and it appeared Lady Jane Grey and her supporters would claim the throne instead of Mary, Mary still did not retreat. Instead, she rallied support throughout England and, along with her half-sister Elizabeth, proudly marched on London to claim her throne and destroy the usurper. When a protestant rebellion threatened Mary’s reign, she famously went to the people and gave a rousing speech to thousands, calling on them to defend her (Simons). In short, Mary I was defiant, headstrong, and incredibly brave. She was the first woman to rule England in her own right, and showed a sexist society that women can be just as effective and inspiring leaders as men. 

So why is “Bloody Mary’s” actual story so forgotten? The reason is undoubtedly a mix of Protestant propaganda and sexism. Essentially, Mary I represented everything male English Protestants feared. Everything Catholic–especially powerful Catholic women–had to be rejected in order for the English patriarchal Protestant identity to maintain itself. Thus, historians chose to portray Mary I as a weak willed woman subject to the demands of her Spanish husband, or as an evil woman who burned innocents to sustain her bloodlust. The latter stuck, and she has been popularly remembered as “Bloody Mary” ever since. 

Queen Mary I deserves better. She was far more than “bloody.” Yes, she was ruthless when necessary; but she was also a highly intelligent, brave, and utterly groundbreaking woman. Her story must be retold so we can see England’s first Queen without the the sexist and anti-Catholic propaganda that has obscured her legacy for so long. 

Conclusion 

It’s highly likely that Queen Mary I and Empress Wu are not the only powerful female leaders to have had their stories utterly demonized. It’s almost certain that countless female leaders have been judged unfairly by the historians who told their stories. Thus, it is essential that we begin to humanize these female leaders, and to contextualize their actions. Female leaders should certainly be allowed to be remembered as horrendous; nevertheless, their actions must be judged the same way that history has judged our most famous male leaders. It’s time we retell the stories of the women that have been reviled or forgotten by history. All women deserve to have their stories told, whether they are considered villains, heroes, or somewhere in between. 

References

Barksdale, Nate. “8 Things You May Not Know About Henry VIII” HISTORY, https://www.history.com/news/8-things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-henry-viii. Accessed 21 July 2021.

Dash, Mike. “The Demonization of Empress Wu.” Smithsonian Magazine, 10 Aug. 2012, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-demonization-of-empress-wu-20743091/

Lee, Yuen Ting. “​​Wu Zhao: Ruler of Tang Dynasty China.” The Association for Asian Studies, 2015, https://www.asianstudies.org/publications/eaa/archives/wu-zhao-ruler- of-tang-dynasty-china/

Simons, Eric Norman. “Mary I | Biography & Facts.” Encyclopedia Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mary-I. Accessed 21 July 2021.

Solly, Meilan. “The Myth of ‘Bloody Mary.’” Smithsonian Magazine, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/myth-bloody-mary-180974221/. Accessed 21 July 2021.


Olivia Hom is a rising sophomore at Mount Holyoke College. She is interested in feminism and intersectionality in today’s world. On campus, Olivia plans to join the student newspaper. She also enjoys writing, photography, listening to music, and playing video games.



Julia Pricephoto.JPG


Julia Price is a rising junior at Middlebury College majoring in International and Global Studies and minoring in linguistics. She is interested in feminism and reproductive justice. She also enjoys narrative podcasts, language learning, and intramural soccer.



The Power in Place Magic

Untitled design.png

By: Sophia Walker, Summer 2021 Collaborator at Power in Place

As I walked into Rep. Ruth Ann Gaines' office, I was struck by how genuine she is as a person. While politicians are real people too, many of us, including myself, see politicians as a figment of our imagination. They seem like a person you see, but one you often do not have the pleasure of getting to know.

After chatting about life, Rep. Gaines and I started the interview. The first question I asked her focused on the first political actions that led her to the position she is in now. Like many other women that ran for office, the first time running, Rep. Gaines lost. That did not mean she did not want to run again. Instead, it gave her the itch to continue to stay involved in politics. Rep. Gaines began to recount her life throughout the interview. She discussed her primary school years while first working as a student-teacher. Being the first African American many of the kids had met, some parents did not want her there. But she did not quit. The students loved her. She continued to teach for over 40 years, ultimately becoming the professor she is today.

Rep. Gaines gave an illuminating picture of her career as an educator while also being a public official. The interview questions began to focus more on change than on herself. I asked her a question about the emotions she experiences as a public official. She thought for a moment and began discussing moments of anger and moments of happiness. The moment of anger came from the law titled Stand Your Ground. The law allows a person who feels that they might be in danger to shoot at the perpetrator. Even if the perpetrator might mean no harm, the person could not face any legal reciprocations from the shooting. Upset about the law, Rep. Gaines knew that it would progress to today’s reality where people legally open carry guns in the State of Iowa. A moment of anger for her, she tried to figure out where to go from there. Rep. Gaines continues outspokenly against this law and the laws derived from it.

A moment of happiness came from the barring of chokeholds by police officers in the State of Iowa. As a member of the Black Caucus, Rep. Gaines helped spearhead the bill last summer. She noted that she thought of Trayvon Martin, George Floyd, and other Black people wrongly killed by the police when working on the bill. She was passionate about the bill, but her constituents also wanted it passed, making the passing exceptional. Rep. Gaines continues to stand with bills of this nature, employing her and her constituent's beliefs. In the interview, the difference in emotion was evident. As the interviewer, I could see her passion and beliefs being a part of her as a person and Representative.

Reflecting on the interview with Rep. Gaines, I began to think about how often public officials get taken for granted. Yes, we raise money or vote for them, but sometimes we forget that they are people. I would never have known that Rep. Gaines held class in the capital. I also would not have known how significant these issues are to her as a person. Part of the Power in Place magic gets highlighted in the stories of women public officials, but it is also in the magic of us meeting them. They are people with other commitments and families who take the time to represent people on top of it all. My interview with Rep. Gaines showed me the promise and grit these public officials have not only to their constituents but to producing change.

 

Sophia Walker is a rising senior at Drake University. She is a double major in Law, Politics and Society and Sociology with a minor in Marketing. Sophia has a passion for social justice and women’s rights. On campus, Sophia is part of the Drake Dems and the Roosevelt Institute. She is also a CASA volunteer in her free time.

Brianna McNeal Disqualified from 2020 Tokyo Olympics

By: Phoenix Mintus, Summer 2021 Collaborator at Power in Place

It recently made headline news that Brianna McNeal was disqualified from the Tokyo Olympics because of a missed drug test and errors in documentation. She was forced to confess to having an abortion two days before the drug test, which was a life decision she wished to remain private, and she was incorrectly given an antidoping violation regardless of the official rules of antidoping violations. With the recent disqualification of Sha’Carri Richardson from the Tokyo Olympics, why has there been recent attacks on Black athletes and their cultural practices in the Olympics?

Brianna McNeal is an athlete that participates in track and field events all around the world. She was set to take part in the 2020 Tokyo Olympics until she missed a drug test because she had an abortion. On January 12, 2020, Brianna McNeal was in bed recovering her abortion two days earlier when anti-doping officials knocked on her door. She didn’t answer the door because she did not hear them arrive, and she missed their phone call that they left.

Eighteen days later, the Athletics Integrity Unit, an organization that investigates antidoping in track and field events, asked her to explain. McNeal explained that she received an abortion the day before her drug test, and she wished to keep the abortion private and confidential. She was requested to provide documentation of her abortion, and after reviewing her doctor’s notes, she incorrectly believed they put down the wrong date for the abortion, so she changed the dates on the forms from January 10th to January 11th. Because of this, she received an antidoping violation.

McNeal was distraught after receiving the results of the hearing. She found that World Athletics did not believe that she was traumatized by the abortion because she continued to post on social media and attend track events after the abortion. This assumption is not only biased, but dangerous considering that abortions impact women and families in different ways. The decision to get an abortion is a heavy one, and it does not impact women lightly. It can take weeks, months, and even years for women to recover. McNeal may have chosen to continue posting and attending athletic events as a manner of coping and getting her life back on track, and she should not be punished or judged for that decision she made. Speaking on the judgment of World Athletics, McNeal stated, “they say that they are protecting athletes that are clean, but I don’t feel protected at all. I just feel like I’m being judged for this very big decision I made that really affected my life.”

The reasoning behind this antidoping violation has become more difficult to understand considering the rules for issuing a violation. According to the rules of the Athletics Integrity Unit, an antidoping violation is issued when three or more drug tests have been missed within a certain period of time. In McNeal’s situation, she only missed one test, and was still issued a violation. In its defense, World Athletics stated the violation was justified because McNeal falsified the doctor’s notes to deceive anti-doping officials so she wouldn’t be penalized for missing the test. However, they failed to consider that this time in her life was very emotional, and it’s very possible that she did truly make an honest mistake in her paperwork. McNeal was facing depression after the procedure, and was under high stress to keep the procedure private due to the stigma of abortions in the United States. Depression is a serious mental health condition that can cause those suffering to perform actions they would not normally do under normal circumstances, and it’s reasonable to conclude that McNeal was struggling and acted outside of the ordinary to cope with the stress and depression she experienced after her abortion The fact that she was given a violation outside of the rules and guidelines, and her depression was not considered, is concerning and unfair.

Investigators not only judged her for her decision and reaction to getting an abortion, but they also insulted her choice to see a spiritual advisor rather than a psychiatrist for her depression after the abortion. In the Black Christian community, the practice of seeing a spiritual advisor when struggling is very common, and it has become a normalized part of the religion. As part of her cultural practice, it should be respected just like any other religious belief and practice. 

The judgment of her decision is not only racist, but insinuates that her cultural practice is unhelpful and that Black pastors are incapable of offering support and guidance to their church members. This attack on McNeal is entirely disrespectful to Black culture, and is entirely insensitive to her religion as well. This disrespect is rooted in racism against Black culture and a lack of respect for the Black Christian community, and should not be tolerated under any level, but especially under a professional organization aimed at protecting athletes and promoting equality and fairness for all athletes.

In McNeal’s case, we’ve realized that World Athletics and the Athletics Integrity Unit acted unfairly and discriminatory in considering Brianna McNeal’s situation and religious and cultural practices. Moving forward, it’s important that organizations protect all athletes and respect their beliefs so that fairness and equality is truly promoted. We must remember that we cannot always understand what’s occurring in someone else’s life, but we should remain respectful, compassionate, and supportive.

References:

[1] Macur, Juliet. “An Abortion, a Missed Drug Test and Altered Records Add Up to Trouble.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 2 July 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/07/01/sports/olympics/abortion-doping-olympics-mcneal.html.

[2] Schad, Tom. “Five-Year Ban against Brianna McNeal Upheld by Court of Arbitration for Sport.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 2 July 2021, www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2021/07/02/brianna-mcneal-out-tokyo-olympics-five-year-ban-upheld-cas/7837419002/.


Profile.jpeg

Phoenix Mintus is an incoming sophomore student at Denison University. He is majoring in Communications and Public Affairs. He is passionate about LGBTQ+ rights and women’s rights. He enjoys reading, writing, and learning new things everyday. On campus, he plans to volunteer and join the student newspaper.

Dare to Run's 2021 Summer Social

1519874247986.png

BY: VANESSA CRESPO, SUMMER 2021 COLLABORATOR AT POWER IN PLACE

I think it is no surprise to find out about the disproportionate sex ratio of elected officials at the local, state, and national level. The organization I was introduced to this summer seeks to rectify this problem. Dare to Run is committed to increasing the number of elected female officials at all levels thus increasing representation for women and successfully implementing public policy that positively affects their communities. Dare to Run is a nonprofit organization founded by Rachelle Suissa, a female leader dedicated to empowering and inspiring women through education. Dare to Run’s mission is to educate and prepare women with the necessary set of skills for public office as well as women of all backgrounds to join the mission of increasing women’s representation in government and politics.

Image from Dare to Run

Image from Dare to Run

I had the awesome opportunity to attend Dare to Run’s summer social in New York City at a lovely place located by the financial district near the 9/11 Memorial & Museum, and I was utterly impressed with the interesting personalities of every board member and attendee at the event. I would consider myself a shy person wherever I go, but even though I didn’t know anyone, I managed to feel completely comfortable. They were so easy to talk to and their commitment to the organization was inspirational. Of course I had to ask Rachelle what her inspiration to start the organization was, and I’m paraphrasing this, but in simple words: “We (women) are tired of men making decisions for us”. She couldn’t have said it better. If we really think about it, women make up 26.7% of the US Congress as of 2021 and 30.6% of statewide executives. In other words, female politicians are still a minority compared to their male counterparts, and this number decreases if we break it up into women of color in public office. 

One consequence of this deficit I’d like to highlight is the recent bill signed by Texas Governor Gregg Abbott that bans abortion at six weeks, which is before many women could possibly be aware of a pregnancy. If this is signed into law, it will restrict and limit the possibilities of women getting an abortion in the safest way possible given that women are running on a short timeframe to make the decision, find a clinic, schedule and appointment, and in some cases, save up enough money for the procedure. 

This is one of the many examples of how decisions made by men will affect the lives of many women by restricting their freedom and right to privacy. When I think about these issues, I cannot thank Dare to Run enough for their initiative to inspire and educate women from all backgrounds to run for public office in order to avoid harmful policy decisions. One of the organization’s values is equality, and it tells us that women should have an equal say in the development of the public policy agenda at all levels of government. I think it is fair to say that we need stronger voices protecting us from future damage done by politicians who do not even understand the complications of being a woman, and more specifically, being a woman of color (in my case at least). Since Dare to Run is a 501 (c) 3 nonprofit organization, they are nonpartisan by law which opens the door to women from all different sides of the political spectrum to speak for and represent various groups. I respect this given that intersectionality takes into account more factors than only sex and race, but also ethnicity, ideology, and culture. Intersectionality demands more diversity in public office to represent these sub-groups. So I believe that we should support more organizations like Dare to Run. We should have the goal of increasing representation for those who might not identify with one politician or party, but may relate to someone who’s willing to speak up for them.


IMG_3073.jpg

Vanessa Crespo is an upcoming senior at the University of Texas at Austin double majoring in Political Science and Philosophy. She is interested in women’s rights, feminist theory, and Latin American politics. In the future, she is aiming at a career in Law but also sees herself as an advocate of women’s rights and human rights in Latin American.




Transgender Women in Office: Names We All Need to Know

By: Sophia Walker, Summer 2021 Collaborator at Power in Place

During the 2020 elections, more transgender women than ever were elected to public office. Along with these women in office, there were also the first transgender women to be Senate confirmed. Dr. Levine's senate confirmation is an astounding accomplishment on its own but shows it is achievable for more of the LGBTQ+ community. These are names we all need to be familiar with as they pave the way for LGBTQ+ people in public office. 

Sarah McBride

Photo Courtesy of Vox

One of the most profound wins for transgender women was from Sarah McBride in Deleware. She won her State Senate race, becoming the first openly transgender state senator [3]. It also put her as the highest-ranking transgender official in America. Previously interning for President Barack Obama and being the first transgender person to speak at the national convention, Sarah McBride is a force to be reckoned with in politics. 

Dr. Rachel Levine

Photo Courtesy of NPR

While Dr. Rachel Levine did not get elected to office, she is the first openly transgender federal official to be confirmed by the Senate [7]. Hailing from Pennsylvania, Dr. Levine amplified support for LGBTQ+ health care. Quoted saying, “My heart is full with a burning desire to help people,” Dr. Levine will continue to serve as Assistant Secretary for Health [1]. 

Taylor Small

Photo Courtesy of Burlington Free Press

At only 26 years old, Taylor Small became the first openly transgender member of the Vermont State Legislature. Small uses her drag persona, Nikki Champagne, to illustrate her passion for helping marginalized people, especially in healthcare [4]. The work she has dedicated to the LGBTQ+ community comes from her grassroots support in community centers. She continues to help younger generations and is sure to continue to make a change in Vermont.

Stephanie Byers

Photo Courtesy of Them.

Another first comes from Stephanie Byers in Kansas. As the first openly transgender legislator in Kansas and the entire Midwest, Byers made history this fall. As an educator for 29 years, Byers helped to increase teaching students about gender identity [5]. Byers also runs a consulting company with her wife that works to educate communities about the importance of understanding gender identity.

Brianna Titone

Photo Courtesy of http://briannaforco.com/

Holding office since 2019, Brianna Titone was the first transgender state legislator elected in Colorado. Originally a geologist, Titone is a devoted volunteer at the Denver Botanic Gardens [6]. In her work as a legislator, Titone has focused on bringing people together. As a human being, she sees working together as a way to make communities better. Rep. Titone has also pushed for the passed bill on Coloradans receiving annual mental wellness checks at cost [2].

While all these women have their identity as trans women in common, they also share a desire to advocate for marginalized people. Continuing their work to increase representation, both in-office and regular life, these women need to be recognized. These women must receive appreciation as we continue to diversify who represents us. 

  1. Belle, Elly. “Rachel Levine Will Be The First Openly Trans Woman To Hold National Office.” How Rachel Levine Nomination Impacts Trans Politicians, Refinery29, 19 Jan. 2021, www.refinery29.com/en-us/2021/01/10267286/rachel-levine-biden-assistant-health-secretary-trans-impact. 

  2. Boyd, Shaun. “Under First-In-The-Nation Law, Coloradans To Receive Annual Mental Wellness Exams At No Cost .” CBS Denver, CBS Denver, 6 July 2021, denver.cbslocal.com/2021/07/06/colorado-mental-health-wellness-law/. 

  3. Brandman, Mariana. “Sarah McBride.” National Women’s History Museum, 2020. Date accessed.

  4. Hallenbeck, Brent. “Taylor Small Wins House Seat to Become First Openly Transgender Member of Vermont Legislature.” The Burlington Free Press, Burlington Free Press, 4 Nov. 2020, www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2020/11/04/taylor-small-first-transgender-vermont-legislator-2020-election-results/6087418002/. 

  5. Neil, Denise, and Jaime Green. “Kansas Makes History, Elects Retired Wichita Teacher as Its First Transgender Legislator.” The Wichita Eagle, 3 Nov. 2020, www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/election/article246927272.html. 

  6. Representative Brianna Titone: HD27, www.briannaforco.com/about. 

  7. Wamsley, Laurel. “Rachel Levine Makes History As 1st Openly Trans Federal Official Confirmed By Senate.” NPR, NPR, 24 Mar. 2021, www.npr.org/2021/03/24/980788146/senate-confirms-rachel-levine-a-transgender-woman-as-assistant-health-secretary. 

 

Sophia Walker is a rising senior at Drake University. She is a double major in Law, Politics and Society and Sociology with a minor in Marketing. Sophia has a passion for social justice and women’s rights. On campus, Sophia is part of the Drake Dems and the Roosevelt Institute. She is also a CASA volunteer in her free time.

 

Why aren’t there more women in politics? It’s not about lack of ambition

women in politics.jpg

BY: Kate murray, summer 2021 student collaborator at power in place

It is widely recognized and accepted that there is a severe deficit of female political leadership in the United States. Despite comprising over half of the American population, the most recent figures put women’s representation in state and local governments at roughly 25 percent, on average. The statistics sink even lower at the federal level, as only 20 percent of Congressional seats are occupied by women. Lack of female representation in politics has always existed, but despite significant advances towards gender equality, women still struggle to enter the political arena. This cannot be attributed simply to women’s lack of ambition or interest in politics, but rather to the multitude of systemic barriers women continue to face in American society.

Surprisingly, the shortage of female political leaders has little to do with the general public not considering them electable. A large majority of the public — 75 percent — think men and women would be equally effective leaders, and this opinion is consistent across party affiliation. In fact, a report from the CUNY Institute for State and Local Governance states women and men tend to win elections at roughly the same rate. The issue, then, is not that women are not seen as capable leaders by the American electorate, but rather that they don’t run in the first place.

Put simply, the social cost of pursuing a political career is much higher for women compared to men. 

Women are subject to a higher level of scrutiny than their male counterparts: They must constantly engage in a balancing act of being assertive, but not to such a degree that the men in the room feel threatened. Their clothing often receives more public attention than their policy actions, and details of their personal lives, such as how they parent their children, are openly ridiculed. The appearance and behavior of women politicians must be impeccable in order to be taken seriously and accepted by their constituents and colleagues, especially those who are male. Women of color have an even more difficult time winning this game, as they are required to prove themselves capable leaders on account of their race as well as their gender. Considering how society treats powerful women, it is no surprise that many of them are hesitant to pursue political careers.

Molly Bangs, a contributor at the Century Foundation, echoes this sentiment. “Women are often discouraged early on from entering politics because they have a vague idea that running for office would be harder for them based on their gender,” she wrote, in a piece for the website in 2017.

Another significant reason women are underrepresented in politics is the lack of encouragement they receive from people in their personal lives, educational institutions and political actors. Whether implicitly or explicitly, family members, coworkers and teachers tend to push women away from largely male-dominated careers, especially if those careers would delay the process of getting married and starting a family. The political establishment also tends to shy away from women politicians, especially women of color. In a 2017 article for the Center for American Progress, senior fellow Judith Warner wrote about these political “gatekeepers” and how they often discriminate against racial and gender minorities, saying,. “Favored candidates tend to be familiar faces who will predictably uphold party interests and — above all — have easy access to money and the ability to devote considerable personal resources, including time, to their campaigns.”

In addition to the profuse amount of social stigma women face in political careers, they also have more systemic barriers to contend with. 

The median wealth for women is significantly lower than that of their male counterparts, but this inequality is especially consequential for women in political careers. Warner speaks to this point in her article, writing, “Many local and state-level elected offices pay so poorly that it’s very difficult for people without deep pockets — or a high-earning spouse — to consider a career in politics.”

In other words, if they’re not wealthy or benefiting financially from a partner, having a political career is not sustainable for many women. Of course, these effects are compounded for women of color, for whom the wealth gap with white men is even more severe. Not only do women find careers in politics to be laden with sexism, the payoff may not even be substantial enough to have a decent standard of living. 

It is clear women have the cards stacked against them when it comes to pursuing political careers. While challenging the systemic roots of sexism is a long uphill battle, individuals and institutions can take action to encourage young, budding political leaders. Colleges and universities can make targeted efforts to recruit women into political science, public policy and law programs. Family members and friends can be more intentional about encouraging and supporting young women who want to pursue political careers, even if doing so puts marriage and child-rearing on hold. This is where more diverse political leadership starts, as once women make the decision to run, the American electorate will propel them to victory. 

Pull quote choices: 

Women are subject to a higher level of scrutiny than their male counterparts: They must constantly engage in a balancing act of being assertive, but not to such a degree that the men in the room feel threatened. 

Lack of female representation in politics has always existed, but despite significant advances towards gender equality, women still struggle to enter the political arena. 

Not only do women find careers in politics to be laden with sexism, the pay off may not even be substantial enough for them to have a decent standard of living. 


Kate Murray.jpg

Kate Murray (she/her) is a rising senior at Mount Holyoke College double-majoring in Politics and Sociology. She is an opinion writer for the college’s newspaper and is involved in social justice activism, with a particular focus on gender inclusion and voting rights. As a summer intern for Power in Place, she co-facilitates the newsletter team and contributes to the blog.



COVID's Impact On Women in the Workforce

Image source: blog.vantagecircle.com

Image source: blog.vantagecircle.com

BY: EMMA LEV AND PHOENIX MINTUS, SUMMER 2021 COLLABORATORS AT POWER IN PLACE

The pandemic has caused disruption for families all over the world. It left people out of work, and as a result, many people, and those supporting others, struggled financially. One aspect of this disruption that should be more widely known is its increased impact on women in the workforce.

Data recorded in February 2021 found that the female labor force in the United States was now 3.1% smaller than February 2020, in comparison to the male labor force becoming 2.2% smaller, a gap between the two of 493,000 people leaving the workforce since the beginning of the pandemic. Why did this disparity occur?

A recent study from the US Bureau of Labor suggests that unlike past recessions and disruptions to the workforce, women have been impacted more than men by the coronavirus pandemic. More women than men initially lost their jobs because female-dominated industries such as restaurants and other retail businesses, healthcare, childcare, and education were hit the hardest in the shutdowns initiated by many different states. Prior to the pandemic, progress was slow but steady for women joining the workforce, participation standing at 58%, though they were still typically underrepresented. Additionally, male-dominated industries like manufacturing were hit harder during recessions than female-dominated areas. Now progress has shifted backwards for working women, and certain industries being hard-hit is far from the only reason.

Data also suggests that women fear contracting the coronavirus more than men, which is why there is a greater chance they choose to work from home or not return to the workforce compared to men. And this fear may be justified: Women were 78 percent of workers in all healthcare jobs in 2019, meaning at least 17 million people are more likely to be exposed to COVID-19.4 In 2020, one in four women, compared to one in five men, considered leaving the workforce or downshifting their careers.5 Once a woman chooses to leave work, she is more likely to not return, as well: While there was a notable increase in men and women retiring in early 2021 compared to 2020, implying the pandemic encouraged many people to retire, there is a gender gap evident here as well.

Disruptions to working women’s lives have not just been caused by losing or quitting their jobs. The pandemic has also forced daycares and schools to close, often leading to at least one parent staying home for childcare purposes. More often than not, women take on this role. The US Bureau of Labor estimated 15 million single mothers were the most affected, and their possibilities are more scarce than other demographics for continuing to work or receiving childcare in another way. Brookings surveyed men and women in May and June 2020 that lost their jobs during the pandemic. One in four women cited the cause as a lack of childcare, twice as many as men. For those that stayed in the workforce, they often had to cut back on hours to balance the increased effort at home. If they could still access needed childcare, the cost proves to be an additional obstacle: A study conducted in 2018 shows the “average childcare costs in every state exceed the federal definition of affordability - 7% of annual household income,” so a caretaker, usually the mother, may have to stay home if they do not have the money to spare.

For women that are able to stay within the workforce, many experience mental difficulties with their new working conditions. Burnout, exhaustion, and increased pressure are more common feelings for women than for men, reported by the 2020 Women in the Workplace study. But women with flexible hours and remote jobs may still have an easier time than other demographics. Those who have in-person or low-income jobs or are single mothers have extra concerns due to covid exposure or childcare. Additionally, from a 2018 American Community Survey, almost half of all working women had low-income jobs, and larger percentages of those people were Black (54%) or Hispanic (64%) compared to white (40%). These groups are some of the hardest-hit by the financial and mental challenges of being a woman with a job during a pandemic.

So as businesses reopen and the American economy starts to recover, what can they do to help working women get back on their feet?

Businesses should offer equal parenting leave for men and women to encourage men to take on a bigger role in childcare. This will help ease pressure on working mothers and provide a stable environment for children at home. Another method of solving the childcare issue is that businesses can offer on-site childcare, not only in white-collared jobs but other industries as well. There is an evident gender gap in higher-paying jobs, so employers should consider hiring more women in these roles to close the gap. 

A big issue throughout the pandemic was that women faced many issues impacting their mental health, such as feelings of burnout and exhaustion. To help their employees, businesses can offer more flexible hours and flexible workspaces, and monitor their employee’s mental health to ensure the working environment is positive and healthy. Jobs may be slowly returning to their pre-pandemic methods, but learning from that time and implementing workplace changes will cause many long-term benefits and help women feel like they belong in the workforce.


References:

[1] Bateman, Nicole, and Martha Ross. “Why Has COVID-19 Been Especially Harmful for Working Women?” Brookings, Brookings, 6 Jan. 2021, www.brookings.edu/essay/why-has-covid-19-been-especially-harmful-for-working-women.

[2] Hammer, Bonnie. “Women Have Lost a Disproportionate Number of Jobs Due to COVID-19.” Time, Time, 25 Jan. 2021, https://time.com/5932620/women-covid-19-jobs/.

[3] Karageorge, Eleni X. “COVID-19 Recession Is Tougher on Women: Monthly Labor Review.” U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Sept. 2020, www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2020/beyond-bls/covid-19-recession-is-tougher-on-women.htm.

[4] Rothwell, Jonathan, and Lydia Saad. “How Have U.S. Working Women Fared During the Pandemic?” Gallup, Gallup, 8 Mar. 2021, https://news.gallup.com/poll/330533/working-women-fared-during-pandemic.aspx.

[5] “Seven Charts That Show COVID-19's Impact on Women's Employment.” McKinsey & Company, McKinsey & Company, 20 Apr. 2021, www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/seven-charts-that-show-covid-19s-impact-on-womens-employment.


Emma Lev is a rising sophomore at the University of Texas at Austin, majoring in English with a certificate in Creative Writing. She enjoys writing short stories, reading books, and drawing in her free time, but her career aspirations lie in editing. She is passionate about feminism, social issues and justice, and journalism.

Phoenix Mintus is an incoming sophomore student at Denison University. He is majoring in Communications and Public Affairs. He is passionate about LGBTQ+ rights and women’s rights. He enjoys reading, writing, and learning new things everyday. On campus, he plans to volunteer and join the student newspaper.

Looking Back At Pride Month: Corporate Rainbow-Washing

By Olivia Hom and Kiersten Hoff

13E58E97-4CCE-428D-B9F4-7C86418A1D99_1_105_c.jpeg

Over the past few years the topic of “rainbow-washing” has become more and more prominent during Pride Month. It’s likely that you’ve noticed rainbow-washing, the near-instant switch at the beginning of June when companies like Amazon or Forever 21 roll out their recolored Twitter and Instagram profile pictures and pride-based merchandise, sporting the rainbow colors of pride in an attempt to show solidarity with the movement. Even ten years ago the thought of major brands promoting LGBTQ+ representation was largely unheard of, and in 2021 we are pretty fortunate that the narrative of love and acceptance towards the LGBTQ+ community has become more popular in many places. ­­­Though rainbow profile pictures and pride themed Vans sneakers seem like a thoughtful decision on the part of major companies in fighting homophobia and transphobia, the underlying foul taste of rainbow-washing has become increasingly obvious. Companies and organizations use the image of pride for their own profit, infiltrate LGBTQ+ spaces for financial gain, and cover up their own immoral practices by appearing to support an underrepresented community. Following Pride 2021, let us take a look back at some of the notable offenders, and their lackluster contributions to the image of Pride this year.

Raytheon

Possibly the most outlandish use of the pride flag this June came at the hands of Raytheon, one of the largest military defense contractors in America. Their rebranded logo sported the color of the progress flag, a more recent pride flag meant to highlight intersectionality in the pride movement. This show of “solidarity,” followed Raytheon’s history of LGBTQ+ inclusivity, as Raytheon boasts a perfect 100 equality index score from the Human Rights Campaign and has been designated by the HRC as a “Best Place to Work.” Given Raytheon’s inclusive image, perhaps this is why the company thought to co-opt the colors of pride in their June marketing. Considering the very nature of Raytheon’s involvement in the military-industrial complex, however, the thought of its participation in Pride is indeed harmful. Responding to the roll-out of the rainbow-washed Raytheon logo, many took to Twitter to call out this absurdity:

pasted image 0.png
pasted image 0(1).png

Raytheon is a major part of the American military-industrial complex. The company supplies militaries with missiles, drones, planes, and other tech. Profiting from its close ties to the Saudi-led coalition, Raytheon has actively fueled the bombings in Yemen since 2015, and has only been halted under the Biden administration. The defense contractor has been a willing participant in mass civilian killings and crimes against humanity, and has worked behind the scenes to push legislation allowing their weapons sales to the Saudi-led coalition to continue. When thinking of the image of Pride Month, should a war-profiteering company be involved? How could this company and its leaders preach love and acceptance on Twitter while profiting from the deaths of hundreds of thousands in reality?

At its core, the pride movement is anti-capitalist, anti-military, and anti-imperialist. Pride is a community driven endeavor which stands against violence at the hands of the hegemony and rejects power structures of oppression. It is insulting that a military defense contractor like Raytheon thinks that it could use the colors of pride to better its own image– because that’s what this was, an attempt to humanize and moralize an immoral company with performative activism in order to best ensure its continuing profits. Raytheon may claim to care about its LGBTQ+ employees, but it is still the duty of the company’s employees and the public to critically think about whether it even deserves to sport the colors of pride given the inherent conflict between the missions of Raytheon and Pride.

Big Oil

Of course, the only thing that could be on the same level of absurdity as a defense contractor for the great American oil company (military) using rainbow-washing this June is in fact a literal oil company also rainbow-washing its social media platforms for Pride Month. That’s right, the American Petroleum Institute, among others, threw up a rainbow-colored logo, celebrating the LGBTQ+ community while also destroying ecosystems, rallying against sustainable energy, and threatening the health and safety of millions. Major oil companies like this are anti-environmentalist and participate in environmental racism, frequently infringing on Native lands and poisoning disenfranchised communities. Why would an oil company think that their money and presence is welcome at Pride? Like Raytheon, the API is antithetical to goals of the LGBTQ+ community.

Amazon

Let’s discuss Amazon and what they do for Pride Month and their LGBTQ+ employees. Amazon has highlighted LGBTQ+ TV shows, movies, authors, artists, and businesses on their website. That is a good start, but what other actions are they taking? While researching, I found out that Amazon has 13 affinity groups (employee resource groups). One is glamazon, a group that supports the LGBTQ+ community. On the Amazon website, glamazon is described as helping “...Amazon be a great place to work by educating and informing employees about the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and/or Queer (LGBTQ+) community and opportunities. The group mentors fellow employees (both LGBTQ+ and allies) and promotes diversity, equity, and inclusion.” Amazon also boasts that they are allies of the LGBTQ+ community because they sponsor Pride events around the world, and they have a transgender toolkit for employees who want to transition. Surprisingly, Amazon’s claim holds credibility because in 2021, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation lists Amazon as being one of the 767 best places to work for LGBTQ+ people. But having LGBTQ+ equality in the workplace isn’t really an achievement. Praising companies for doing the bare minimum is not very helpful. It should already be a given that LGBTQ+ workers are treated fairly. The fact that it is not is extremely disappointing. 

While it’s great that Amazon is making the effort to support its LGBTQ+ employees and to teach others, Amazon being a “great place to work” is debatable. Because Amazon cannot claim to support LGBTQ+ rights while continuing to exploit its workers and causing the demise of many small businesses. 

Amazon is notorious for its workplace controversies due to its anti-union stance. In fact, “there have been 301 federal investigations initiated against Amazon since 2012, resulting in 59 workplace violations” (Hayasaki). In addition, there have been complaints about how Amazon has reacted to the coronavirus pandemic. Some employees feel that the company has not been doing enough to protect them and to support those who don’t feel comfortable coming to work in person. Amazon, and other companies, like to brag about how inclusive they are while disregarding their unfair labor practices. 

Additionally, for small businesses, Amazon is a double edged sword. On one hand, Amazon gives them an opportunity to sell their products to a wider audience. Yet on the other hand, Amazon is seen as a threat by many small business owners. As a large corporation, Amazon wields a lot of power, making it difficult for small retailers who are not partnered with them to compete. There lies the disconnect between Amazon and the LGBTQ+ community. Grassroots activism, predominantly led by trans women of color, has always been a huge part of Pride. Activism has always emphasized sustainability and local businesses, not multinational corporations. 

Gap Inc.

Gap Inc., known for its brands such as Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic, and Athleta, is another example of a company that participated in rainbow-washing. Like Amazon, Gap Inc. is just doing the bare minimum to support the LGBTQ+ community. It would be too much to examine every brand that is part of Gap Inc., so I will focus on Gap. For Pride Month, Gap has collaborated with artists to create an exclusive line of t-shirts. Their website states “To support the LGBTQ community beyond Pride month, we're proud to donate $50,000 to GLAAD....” That sounds great, right? But $50,000 isn’t much, considering the net sales of Gap Inc. in 2020 totaled $13.8 billion (Gap Inc.). Surely Gap could afford to give more than a measly $50,000. It would’ve been better if Gap donates all the money they earn from these t-shirts to GLAAD. It seems very cheap because Gap’s profit will obviously be higher than $50,000. Overall, this collaboration feels like a cash grab. A lot of brands know of the buying power of the LGBTQ+ community, known as the “pink dollar,” so they pander to them by putting rainbows on everything. Pride is more than just a rainbow on a cute shirt or bag. 

Furthermore, according to the site Good On You, which assesses the sustainability of clothing brands, Gap received the “it’s a start” rating. That means the brand is taking some steps to be more environmentally friendly, but it’s not enough because Gap isn’t “taking adequate steps to ensure payment of a living wage for its workers” (Good On You). Also, Gap Inc.’s associates (members, employees, owners, or family members) have donated money to politicians that seek to undermine LGBTQ+ rights, such Donald Trump. 

The list of corporations who keep abusing the rainbow flag for their own profits could go on. The problem with rainbow-washing is how companies’ support of the LGBTQ+ community is insincere and performative. For one month a year it’s “happy sunshine pride, we love our LGBTQ+ people,” while the rest is funding PACs that directly support anti-LGBTQ+ policies, violence, discrimination, capitalism, anti-environmentalism, etc. What these companies don’t understand is that supporting the LGBTQ+ community is not just a one month event, it should be a lifetime commitment. They cannot support LGBTQ+ rights while also denying the rights of others. Now that Pride Month 2021 has come to an end, it is imperative that we remember to support sustainable, LGBTQ+ owned businesses, continue to raise awareness about issues affecting the LGBTQ+ community, and donate to LGBTQ+ people in need of money or to organizations that will directly benefit the LGBTQ+ community.

Addendum

Revisiting these companies after June has ended, we see that many companies have switched back to their original, pre-Pride layouts across social media and on their websites. Many joke about the way companies drop the rainbow the second June is over:

312BDC2A-B496-4E41-8E95-4B611592834B_1_201_a.jpeg
E427886D-B7FC-4CC4-B1CE-0852EC023261_1_105_c.jpeg

It is clear that their support of the LGBTQ+ community was performative and a for-profit endeavor made to use the image of Pride for their own benefit. When companies take on the image of activism and progressivism it is important to take a step back and examine their motivations.

References

  1. “Affinity groups.” Amazon, 2021, https://www.aboutamazon.com/affinity-groups

  2. “Best Places to Work for LGBTQ Equality 2021.” Human Rights Campaign Foundation, 2021, https://www.hrc.org/resources/best-places-to-work-for-lgbtq-equality-2021

  3. “Gap.” Good On You, 2020, https://directory.goodonyou.eco/brand/gap

  4. “Gap Inc.” OpenSecrets.org, 2020, https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/gap-inc/recipients?id=D000000547

  5. “Gap Inc. Reports Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2020 Results; Provides 2021 Outlook.” Gap Inc., 4 Mar 2021, https://www.gapinc.com/en-us/articles/2021/03/gap-inc-reports-fourth-quarter-and-fiscal-year-202

  6. Hayasaki, Erika. “Amazon's Great Labor Awakening.” The New York Times, 18 Feb. 2021, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/18/magazine/amazon-workers-employees-covid-19.html

  7. LaForgia, Michael and Walt Bognadich. “Why Bombs Made in America Have Been Killing Civilians in Yemen.” The New York Times, 6 May, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/16/us/arms-deals-raytheon-yemen.html.

  8. “Raytheon Technologies awarded perfect score by Human Rights Campaign for corporate equality; company partners with HRC to enable program expansion.” Raytheon Technologies, 03 June 2021, https://www.rtx.com/news/news-center/2021/06/03/raytheon-technologies-awarded-perfect-score-by-human-rights-campaign-for-corporat.

  9. Yoder, Kate. “Big Oil is awash in rainbows for Pride Month.” Grist, 4 June 2021,

    https://grist.org/accountability/big-oil-is-awash-in-rainbows-for-pride-month/?utm_campaign=sprout&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_content=1623262527.


Olivia Hom is a rising sophomore at Mount Holyoke College. She is interested in feminism and intersectionality in today’s world. On campus, Olivia plans to join the student newspaper. She also enjoys writing, photography, listening to music, and playing video games.

Kiersten Hoff is in her fifth year at the University of Michigan, and will be receiving a B.A. in Classical Civilizations and Arts & Ideas in the Humanities come this Fall. She is passionate about social activism as well as the arts, and hopes to combine the two throughout her future career. Outside of her academic and artistic life, Kiersten loves video games, playing piano, and hanging out with her cat.

Meet Junie Joseph

Boulder City Councilwoman Junie Joseph. Source: Boulder City Council

Boulder City Councilwoman Junie Joseph. Source: Boulder City Council

BY JULIA BOCCABELLA, SUMMER 2021 COLLABORATOR

In the weeks before November 8th, 2019, the city of Boulder, Colorado was sprinkled with yard signs promoting candidates for Boulder’s upcoming city council election. Every day on my walk to and from campus, I’d give the signs a passing glance, remembering the names and faces on them as that daily walk became my daily routine. I’ll admit it – I didn’t know much about city council elections, and they didn’t come up in conversations with any of my peers. College life in Boulder is often hectic, and to many young people, taking the time to dive into local politics is something we don’t think about often. This was especially true in the fall of 2019. There was a collective anxiety in the air about the upcoming Democratic primaries and the looming cloud of the 2020 presidential election, dubbed “the most important election of our lifetimes”. The signs promoting Boulder’s city council elections seemed like background noise against the din of the upcoming presidential race. Still, though, amidst all that noise, I remembered the smiling face of a woman named Junie Joseph on those yard signs. And amidst that noise, Junie was working hard to make Boulder a better place.

Born in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, Junie emigrated to the U.S. when she was 14 years old. She lived in Florida with her mother and five younger brothers, graduating from the University of Florida with a B.A. in Political Science and a minor in Anthropology. Later, she received her Master’s in Applied Human Rights from the University of York in England. This is only where the list of her accomplishments begins, and to say that Junie’s resume is impressive would certainly be an understatement. This year, Junie was appointed to the National League of Cities' 2021 Human Development Committee, where she guides the league’s policy positions and advocacy agendas on a variety of issues including poverty, social services, and education. She previously served on the Community Corrections’ Board and as the chair of the Boulder County Health and Human Services Citizen Panel Review. Prior to moving to  Boulder, Junie worked tirelessly for human and civil rights with organizations all over the globe. As an intern, Junie worked with the United Nation’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva, and later went on to work with the UN’s Mission to the Central African Republic as a Human Rights Officer. There, she served those in the region of Bria who were displaced by the ongoing civil war. Junie also served as a global law and development fellow for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in Côte D’Ivoire, advocating for the access rights of disabled persons in the Ivorian justice system.

In July of 2020, while attending CU Boulder’s law school, Junie Joseph decided to run for city council. She was motivated in part by her own experience with the socioeconomic divisions that ripple through Boulder: the skyrocketing cost of living, the housing crisis, and the lack of support and representation for working class residents, students, and residents of color. Junie herself worked as a volunteer with the Boulder Shelter for the Homeless, seeing the effects of Boulder’s affordable housing crisis from the front lines. She launched a strong campaign that reached out to voters of all different backgrounds in Boulder, devoting significant attention to those most affected by inequality in the city. The need for affordable housing, improved programs for those experiencing homelessness, government efficiency, and environmental protection became key goals of Junie’s campaign. The race was not without challenges. Junie was a relative newcomer, a working-class student and woman of color – a candidate very different from the usual makeup of Boulder’s city council: older white homeowners and business owners who weren’t working-class. But that November, after a lot of hard work and a strong campaign, voters in Boulder elected Junie Joseph as one of the city’s new council members. She currently serves as Mayor Pro Tempore.

2020 was a year that radically changed the world and laid bare the inequalities and challenges that so many Americans face in their everyday lives. As a Boulder city council member, Junie and the council worked to address the needs of Boulder’s residents during a very difficult time. The council fought to protect and restore funding for social services and programs like the local fire department, library, and severe weather shelters which faced funding cuts during the pandemic. As a member of various committees, Junie supported initiatives promoting racial equality, better and safer infrastructure, and a greener, more sustainable Boulder. Junie continues to fight for the people of Boulder despite considerable pushback and challenges – proposing suggestions to reform the local police department, protect renters, preserve local open space, promote ethnic and gender diversity in city commissions, and expand affordable housing.

Fall of 2019 probably wasn’t a time that many people kept local politics at the forefront of their minds. The constant stream of information about the upcoming 2020 presidential race, for many, created an ever-present buzz of stress that often pitched towards an uncomfortable roar. World politics remained tense, constantly changing, and overwhelming. And of course, the stresses and responsibilities of everyday life never seem to cut anyone a break, especially those who face structural marginalization in society. It’s easy to get lost in the crazy world of big politics and the 24-hour news cycle. Junie’s story shows that not only is change possible in the seemingly smaller cities and towns many of us live in, but that it’s important. Local politics are worthy of our time and attention. Junie Joseph is proof of this: she has an impressive resume working on big issues with organizations as influential as the UN, but that doesn’t mean the city council of Boulder isn’t an impactful office where she can create change for the better. It’s worthy of her time because she thinks the people of Boulder deserve better. And it’s a reminder to all of us that local politics can make our communities better places for all of us to live in – including our friends, family, and neighbors - and that’s certainly worth our time.

Think about the walks you take to class, into town, to a friend’s house. What do you see?

I see a lot of things. The beautiful Flatirons in the background. Unhoused community members greeting students by name with a warm smile and a quick chat. City busses making their stops. My friends, many of whom are visibly exhausted after working long hours to pay for tuition and still make this month’s rent. Professors, groundskeepers, parents on walks with their children. And for many days, I saw Junie Joseph’s signs. I didn’t know it then, but it was a sign that there was one of us – a fellow CU Buff and Boulderite – who saw all the people and places that make up Boulder and felt that was something worth fighting for. Local politics matter, and your community will thank you for being an active and informed part of it. Your voice is needed, it’s valuable, and you matter.


blogheadshot.jpg

Julia Boccabella is a senior at the University of Colorado – Boulder majoring in Philosophy and Sociology. She is passionate about women’s rights, economic justice, and creating a more peaceful world.

LGBTQ+ Media Recommendations for Pride Month

By: Isabel Aragon & Britney Cheung, 2021 Summer Collaborators at Power in Place

In celebration of Pride Month, we wanted to highlight some LGBTQ+ media that we recommend!

Those Who Wait by Haley Cass

Those Who Wait is a lesbian adult romance novel independently written and published by Haley Cass. The story follows Sutton Spencer, a literature graduate student and newly-out bisexual in her mid-twenties, and her relationship with twenty-eight-year-old Charlotte Thompson, a lesbian, who has aspirations of following her grandmother (who in this alternate U.S., was the first female president) into politics. Throughout the story, Charlotte is running for a vacant seat in the US House of Representatives against an older, female conservative candidate and feels she has to keep her sexuality hidden in order to win the election. Charlotte struggles with her growing romantic feelings towards Sutton against her need to keep her private life a secret and guard her heart. This book does an excellent job portraying some of the behind-the-scenes in politics and the fear LGBTQ+ politicians may feel when deciding whether or not to come out publicly. I recommend Those Who Wait to anyone interested in lesbian romance and in reading about how a queer politician’s relationship decisions can affect both their career and their own well-being. Those Who Wait is available online as an ebook, or it can be purchased from Amazon as a physical book. Please be advised that there are scenes with sexual content and this book is for 18+ only.


Isabel Aragon is a rising junior at Smith College. She is majoring in Women & Gender Studies and minoring in Film & Media Studies and hopes to pursue an Archives Concentration as well. Isabel is from Santa Barbara, CA, and is passionate about LGBTQ+ representation in media and reproductive justice. On campus, she is part of Groove A Cappella.



Portrait of A Lady on Fire by Céline Sciamma

MV5BNjgwNjkwOWYtYmM3My00NzI1LTk5OGItYWY0OTMyZTY4OTg2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyODk4OTc3MTY@._V1_.jpg

Céline Sciamma’s fourth feature film, Portrait of A Lady on Fire, presents a cinematic masterpiece, bringing life to the power, freedom, and passion that is represented by fire – the diegetic crackling and mild luminescence of fire brings warmth to the cold, bleak spaces of the seaside manor; it illuminates solidarity and strength onto those discriminated by oppressive social forces; it burns in declaration of an anguished love, setting the two women free, for a fleeting while, to come to a fearful revelation of their deep affection for each other.  

Bathed in soft pastel colors, the movie is set in the late 18th century in the French countryside of Brittany. It first introduces us to Marianne, an artist tasked to paint a portrait of the unwitting Hélöise, which is to be sent to a noble Frenchman in Milan as a pre-marital tradition. Yet in Hélöise’s stubborn refusal to marry a stranger, her mother hires Marianne under the disguise of a “walking partner” and instructs her to observe Hélöise’s features during their strolls along the beach. The camera follows the pace of the characters and replicates their point of view as we see close-up shots of Marianne observing, with a fierce sense of intensity and determination, at the complexions and silhouettes of Heloise’s ears, neck, fingers. At first, she does so out of obligation, but as Hélöise begins to reciprocate an interest in their relationship, her stares shift from ones characterized by objective studies to impassioned gazes. Through their sparse exchanges of words, the two come to a profound understanding of each other – this is not a love story saturated with flowery expressions of romance; rather, it is in the mutual knowledge of their subtle changes in expression and intimate details in their thoughts that cements this forbidden love affair.

While the film strays far away from the traditional narrative arc, the story reaches its climax in a scene where fire becomes prominent. Marianne and Hélöise attend a gathering with about a dozen women at a bonfire, where they seek advice to deal with the unwanted child of Heloise’s young maid Sophie. This subplot bravely confronts the taboo subject of abortion as a representation of female power and camaraderie – in the face of cultural standards and expectations that constrain their autonomy, they arrive at the bonfire to support each other, to lift their spirits through rhythm and harmony as the motion of slow chanting erupts into a joyous celebration of the women who have come to fly[1]. The scene is largely similar to one from Sciamma’s previous movie Girlhood, where the four main characters, in an instant of pure joy and friendship, put aside their troubles in the real world as they sing and dance along to Rihanna’s “Diamonds”. In Girlhood, the lush blue hue of the hotel room slips the girls into an almost transcendental experience of empowerment; in Portrait of A Lady on Fire, the gentle glow of the bonfire emits an incandescent passion – the fire liberates the women, albeit momentarily, and allows them to soar above the earthly boundaries set forth by men. At the same time, Marianne and Hélöise look at each other, smiling for the first time, but with a pang of despair in the knowledge that their love will remain illegitimate.  There is a gothic-esque quality to the sequence when Hélöise’s dress lights on fire. In the moment she is set free, but the fire is almost immediately put out, and the audience is reminded of the reality of their love. Despite these unfavorable circumstances, Portrait of A Lady on Fire is nonetheless a mesmerizing ballad of an unfeigned, exquisite romance, one that paints grand gestures of love with every delicate brushstroke on the portrait canvas.

[1] The lyrics to the song were written by Sciamma in Latin. “Fugere non possum” translates to “they come fly”, which was taken from a sentence in Fredrich Neitzche’s novel Thus Spoke Zarathustra, “the higher we soar, the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly”.


Britney Cheung is a rising third-year at the University of Virginia majoring in Political and Social Thought. She is interested in human rights, particularly those of women, racial minorities, and immigrants. On campus, Britney is involved in various classical music groups and volunteering organizations.