Make America Care About Women Again

When Donald Trump was campaigning for president, one of the issues that was consistently at the forefront of my mind was that of women’s health – my health – and I was scared. And I wasn’t alone.

During his campaign, his obvious sexism came out over and over again, each remark and incident seeming even more sexist and misogynistic than the last. From threatening to sue and calling the several women that came forward about having been sexually harassed liars to basically giving men the go-ahead to assault women, it became pretty evident to me, and to people all around the world, that this man has an inherent hatred for women.


Photo by: George Skidmore, “Donald Trump”, (CC BY-SA 2.0), via flickr

Throughout his campaign, Trump vowed to make it harder for women to access birth control via the defunding of Planned Parenthood, which would also cut women off from receiving other basic forms of health care, including essential procedures like mammograms and Pap smears,  basically stripping women of their basic healthcare and bodily autonomy.

At the Republican Presidential Debate of February 26, 2016, Trump said this about Planned Parenthood:

As far as Planned Parenthood is concerned, I’m pro-life. I’m totally against abortion, having to do with Planned Parenthood. But millions and millions of women — cervical cancer, breast cancer — are helped by Planned Parenthood.

So you can say whatever you want, but they have millions of women going through Planned Parenthood that are helped greatly. And I wouldn’t fund it.

I would defund it because of the abortion factor, which they say is 3 percent. I don’t know what percentage it is. They say it’s 3 percent. But I would defund it, because I’m pro-life. But millions of women are helped by Planned Parenthood.

Okay, so there are several things about this statement that I could bring up to criticize it. Like the fact that he says he doesn’t believe the fact that only 3 percent of Planned Parenthood’s services are abortions, despite literally admitting that he doesn’t “know what percentage it is.” Or the fact that it’s full of logical fallacies and that he really can’t form a completely coherent sentence.

But instead, I’m going to focus on its contradictory nature.

Trump blatantly states that “millions and millions of women” receive healthcare from Planned Parenthood and are “helped greatly,” but then states that he doesn’t really care because they also provide abortions, too.


Photo by: Fibonacci Blue, “Planned Parenthood in St. Paul”, (CC BY 2.0), via flickr

The man is so concerned with his own desires that he’s willing to overlook the needs of **literally** millions and millions of women that receive basic and life-saving health services from Planned Parenthood.

Despite what Trump might or might not know, Planned Parenthood’s 2014-2015 annual report (the most recent one that I could find) reports that, indeed, only 3% of services they provided were abortion services. The majority of their services, 45%, were STI/STD testing and treatment which, by the way, includes testing for women AND men.

The second most common service that Planned Parenthood provides, coming in at 31%, is different forms of contraception, which actually includes vasectomies. I mean, I’m no expert, but the fact that Planned Parenthood provides so many women with contraception is probably part of the reason why their abortion rate is so low. But that’s just me.

So, yeah, millions and millions of women are helped by Planned Parenthood, but many men are, too. Defunding Planned Parenthood isn’t just a women’s issue – we need to stop pretending like it is.

But even if it were solely a women’s issue, why should that make it any less legitimate?


The Pay Gap and the Media

Mind the Gap

So as I began to write this post, it was April 4th, Equal Pay Day. This day marks how far into the year that women, because of the pay gap between males and females, must work to make the same amount of money as men did for the previous year. Equal Pay Day is a way in which social media is used to bring attention to this social injustice – its hashtag was trending worldwide almost all day on Twitter.

equalpayday trend

Picture by: Sara Nicotra

In Chapter 9 of Media and Social Justice, “Feminism and Social Justice: Challenging the Media Rhetoric,” which I mention in a previous post of mine in which I also discuss the pay gap, Margaret Gallagher quotes a magazine interview with Sir Stuart Rose. In it, he claims that “there really are no glass ceilings” and that women have “got more equality than you can ever deal with” (131). It seems to me that he’s almost suggesting that we have more rights than we actually deserve. Nice.

According to the American Association of University Women, contrary to what Rose might believe, white women were paid just 80% of what men were paid in 2015. This number varies, though, according to factors like age, motherhood, level of education, state of employment, and especially race, which is extremely important to remember and bring up when talking about the pay gap; it sometimes gets lost in conversation. I found particularly shocking was how much the pay gap varied from state to state. In New York it’s only 89% while in Wyoming it’s 64%. I knew that the pay gap varied greatly according to race, but I had no idea that there was this much of a difference from state to state.

Oh and by the way, the AAUW also says that at the rate we’re going now, the gap won’t close completely for another 135 years. It will be 2152 before women achieve wage equality. I’d be 156, but don’t worry, I’ll be cheering the women of the future on from the afterlife.

Anyway, as Gallagher points out, the World Economic Forum reported that the gender gaps in 16 of 114 countries actually widened over a span of five years (132). The gaps measured include not only gaps in pay, but also gaps in education, economic and political participation (this includes pay gaps), and health. In 2010, when Media and Social Justice was published, the United States ranked 19th out of 134 countries in gender equality. In 2016, we ranked 45th out of 144. “Yikes” is an understatement. I think it’s pretty clear that we have a lot of work to do. (I found all of these numbers from the Global Gender Gap Reports on the World Economic Forum’s website; you should check it out).

Iceland: An Example


Photo by: Bjarki Sigursveinsson, “17. júní”, (CC BY-SA 2.0), via flickr

Putting the United States to shame by coming in first in both 2010 and in 2016 (and every year in between) is Iceland. Though the wage gap still exists there, too, Iceland is the first country to make big moves to try and close it. Within the last week, a bill was proposed to parliament that “would require companies to prove they offer equal pay to employees,” risking fines and auditing if they don’t obey. Not only does it prevent pay discrimination towards women, but it also bans discrimination based on sexual orientation, disability, race, and religion. The United States needs to be more like Iceland, we all do.

With that being said, I didn’t see this information trending on Twitter, Facebook, or any other website that I usually get see news like this on. I’m signed up to a service that sends out an email every morning that gives readers the lowdown on what’s been going on in the world. It’s perfect for me – I don’t have a TV, so I don’t watch the news, and the news updates are short and to the point. I learned about this bill from the email that I received on March 29th, and I haven’t seen anything about it, without having to actively look for the information, since then.

The last chapter of Media and Social Justice, Mickey Huff and Peter Phillips’ “Media Democracy in Action,” begins with a discussion of what kind of information dominates the media, basically claiming that Americans and the American media are often concerned with useless and insignificant information. Which is true.

Specifically, they bring up the 2007 death of Anna Nicole Smith, someone who I hadn’t even heard of before she died. They state that the coverage of her death and the paternity debate that followed was “among one of the longest interrupted ‘news’ broadcasts at CNN” since 9/11. Around the same time, however, “the US ambassador to Iraq misplaced $12 billion in shrink-wrapped one-hundred-dollar bills that were flown to Baghdad,” and that was getting very little coverage (242). I don’t remember hearing about that like I heard about Anna Nicole Smith.

I talked about this in another post in which I bring up the idea that there has to be important information that we’ve been missing because of what the media chooses to cover instead. The fact that I haven’t seen any coverage whatsoever, not even as a brief trending topic on Twitter or a shared video on Facebook, on this proposed bill in Iceland is a testament to that.

As Huff and Phillips put it, free press was created to “keep the citizenry informed, engaged, and in dialogue with one another about crucial issues of the day” (251). How are we supposed to be informed and engage with these critical issues if the issues aren’t even being presented to us?

It’s no secret that there is a lot going on in our country in regard to politics and the government. So what are we missing? What kinds of bills and laws being signed into action are we not hearing about? What’s being swept under the rug, whether purposefully or inadvertently? And, more importantly, why are we letting this continue to happen??

Equal Work?

One of the main arguments against the strive towards equal pay is that women are paid less because they elect to be paid less by entering career fields and jobs that just pay less than other fields that tend to be male-dominated (I’m looking at you, STEM). Or they blame it on the fact that women choose jobs with liberal maternity leave policies or that they are less educated than their male counterparts. They, unsurprisingly, like blaming things on women.

However, the pay gap that really exists is that between men and women with the same jobs and with the same education and with the same everything, really.


Photo by: Pulicciano, “Hollywood Emmy Rossum”, (CC BY-SA 2.0), via flickr

The reality of the pay gap is perfectly illustrated in a recent battle for a pay raise between Shameless’ Emmy Rossum and the producers of the show. Rossum plays an oldest sister who is the head of a dysfunctional family in the South Side of Chicago while William H. Macy plays the deadbeat, drug-addicted, alcoholic father. They pretty much have equal time on screen, I would argue that Rossum might have more, and are literally doing the same job, but Macy had recently been given a raise.

So she fought back.

Rossum sought a deal with Showtime and Warner Bros to not only be paid the same as Macy, but to be paid more than Macy. It sounds like it was a battle – Showtime could have canceled the show or kept it going without her. It was talked about a lot on social media – I saw it over and over again on Twitter. While Emmy Rossum was most definitely getting paid more than the majority of working women before she got the raise, it just goes to show that the pay gap is real in all fields of work and that the struggle is real for us all.

Rossum’s public battle with the media that was covered on the media did great work in bringing even more attention to the issue. As Sue Curry Jansen says in the introduction of Media and Social Justice, “media exposure is an essential constituent of all successful social movements” (6).  While Rossum’s personal battle with her producers won’t close the pay gap, it brings attention to not only the issue itself, but also to the fact that women of all statuses and careers are subjects of this injustice, even those that work in the public eye.

The pay gap, and the gender gap in general, continues to be an issue even though there we have been making strides to close it. As Jansen suggests, we can harness the media and use it to our advantage in our fight to strengthen this social movement. We’ve seen what the power of the media can do over and over and over again. When used well, it’s a force to be reckoned with. And so are we.

Our Youth and Our Future

The seventh chapter of Media and Social Justice, Lora Taub-Pervizpour and Eirinn Disbrow’s “Detours through Youth-Driven Media: Backseat Drivers Bear Witness to the Ethical Dilemmas of Youth Media,” highlights youth and their interaction with social justice-orientated media usage. They follow a program called the Healthy Youth Peer Education (HYPE) in the Allentown School District in Pennsylvania, which “offers high school-age youth opportunities to engage in social change and public advocacy through leadership development, digital storytelling, the performing arts, and documentary work” (98).

Although I hadn’t heard of HYPE before reading this chapter, this piece really piqued my interest; not only is Allentown only about a half hour away from Kutztown, but last spring I volunteered to help one of the Allentown School District’s middle schools with their school musical, so reading about an environment and students that were somewhat familiar to me really helped put this chapter into context. Also, based on the students that I worked on the musical with, I think that HYPE is something that is a really great program to have been introduced to the community; it’s giving students a way to produce “stories that document sufferings, losses, and traumas based on class, race, gender, ethnicity, and sexuality that they directly experience or witness within their communities” (98).

Taub-Pervizpour and Disbrow’s attention and dedication to the youth of Allentown is extremely important; the youth is the future. We (millennials and those who are younger than us) are given a bad rap, especially when it comes to our social media and cell phone usage. But, much to our critics’ dismay, social media can be used for good!!! It’s a means for social activism and social justice, and the HYPE program highlights that and assists students to harness the power of the media.

I see the engagement of today’s youth all over social media, specifically on Twitter and Facebook, much more now than when I was in middle school or even high school. I see young people voicing educated opinions on touchy subjects, proudly labeling themselves as feminists (something I didn’t even do until I was in college), and voluntarily getting involved in politics. I saw so many students under 18 showing interest in the past election and voluntarily watching debates and educating themselves on many of the issues at hand – and they couldn’t even vote!!

This kind of involvement that I see across social media gives me a lot of hope for the future. I believe that we, as individuals who grew up with technology and have watched it develop, will further harness social media and continue to use them as, as Taub-Pervizpour and Disbrow put it, “powerful tools of change” (97).


Real Fake News

The last chapter of Media and Social Justice, “Media Democracy in Action: Truth Emergency and the Progressive Media Reform Movement,” Mickey Huff and Peter Phillips begin their piece by discussing some of the major news stories of the few years before the publishing of the book. They bring up, among a few others, the death of Michael Jackson, Michael Phelps’ marijuana usage, Jessica Simpson’s and Tyra Banks’ bodies, and (my personal favorite) the Balloon Boy hoax. They seem disturbed, and rightfully so, with what has been and is being “mainstreamed as news” (242).

The story that Huff and Phillips focus on the most is Anna Nicole Smith’s death in 2007, calling it, however tragic, “one of the most egregious examples of an overabused news story” (241). They even liken it to CNN’s coverage of 9/11; the coverage of Smith’s death was one of the “longest uninterrupted ‘news’ broadcasts at CNN since the tragic events of September 11, 2001” (242). I hadn’t even heard of Anna Nicole Smith until her death, and then all of a sudden she and the paternity battle over her daughter were everywhere.

The thing that shocked me the most about their discussion of the news coverage that surrounded Smith’s death is that around the same time, “The US ambassador to Iraq misplaced $12 billion in shrink-wrapped one-hundred-dollar bills that were flown to Baghdad” (242) it was not getting nearly the same amount of media coverage.

What kinds of things are we missing now? All of this “tabloidized, trivialized, and outright useless information” (241) as Phillips and Huff call it, is still going on today, maybe even more so. Much of the media focuses on stories like the misbehaved teenager that appeared on Dr. Phil getting her own reality show. Even when actual newsworthy events happen, like human-rights lawyer Amal Clooney standing up against ISIS at the UN, the media is focused on other things like a woman’s baby bump or what she is wearing while trying to make a real difference in the world.

With our country in the political climate this it is in right now, this sort of arbitrary information is, in my opinion, the kind of “fake news” we need to be worried about. It’s the kind of “fake news” that is distracting us from from the important stories, like those about laws being signed into action or those about human rights being taken away, that are being swept under the rug.

Equal Pay and Protests

Chapter 9 of Media and Social Justice is on one of my favorite topics – feminism. Margaret Gallagher’s “Feminism and Social Justice: Challenging  the Media Rhetoric” begins with the following quote from a magazine interview with a man named Sir Stuart Rose:

Girls [sic] today have never had it so good, right? Apart from the fact that you’ve got more equality than you can ever deal with, the fact of the matter is the you’ve got real democracy and there really are no glass ceilings, despite the fact that some of you moan about it all the time … I mean what else do you want? Women astronauts. Women miners. Women dentists. Women doctors. Women managing directors. What is it you haven’t got?

Before I looked him up, I could just tell from this quote that he was probably an upper-class, middle-aged white man. And look! I was right!

Sir Stuart Rose

Photo by: NHS Confederation, “Sir Stuart Rose,” (CC BY 2.0) via flickr

After a quick Google search, I learned that Sir Stuart Rose is the ex-CEO of Marks & Spencer, a large British retailer, and a conservative businessman. While this kind of thought and rhetoric is more often than not found mostly in men like Rose, it has also recently been found in the minds of women.

I know I keep coming back to the Women’s Marches, but so many aspects about the marches and the backlash that followed them have been relevant and are relatable to what we’ve been reading in class. After the marches, I saw many women posting on social media, specifically on Facebook, about how they felt that the rallying wasn’t needed and why they felt that they, as a woman, didn’t need it because they’re being paid enough or have access birth control or were able to vote in our presidential election. They were sharing open letters about why they didn’t march for their daughters and why these kinds of issues are the least of our concerns. To put it into Rose’s words, they are the women that feel like we have “got more equality than [we] can ever deal with.”

This kind of rhetoric, however, is exactly why we marched. We marched because we still are being paid less than men for the same job. We marched because the glass ceiling does exist. As Gallagher points out, even though there are women astronauts and miners and dentists and doctors and managing directors, women in the UK, as of the book’s 2010 publishing, make up “less than 20 percent of members of parliament,” “earn 17 percent less per hour than men,” and only make up “4 percent of executive directors of the country’s top 100 companies” (132). So no, we’re not going to stop “moaning about it.”

Rose’s quote also made me think about social movements to boycott certain companies for their actions and beliefs. The fact that the ex-CEO of Marks and Spencer perpetuates sexism and clearly has beliefs that are so different than mine would make me not want to give my business to that company. However, Marks and Spencer is a huge retailer in England. You’re pretty much never more than a 5 minute walk away from an M&S in London; it’s hard to avoid.

Recently, there has been a lot of backlash against Uber for some of their actions. The hashtag #deleteuber, from what I saw, at least, started the day that Trump signed his first Muslim ban when mass protests erupted at airports across the country. As CNN explains in this article, while “the New York City Taxi Worker’s Alliance called for a complete stop to pickups from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. at JFK airport” where visa-holders were being detained and many people were protesting, “Uber said that it was suspending surge pricing from JFK – effectively lowering the cost of a ride,” essentially “crossing the picket line.” The hashtag quickly spread across all forms of social media.

Sometime within the next day, Lyft, Uber’s top competition, sent out an email that included this:


Photo by: Sara Nicotra

I used both Lyft and Uber pretty regularly when I was going to school in Long Beach, California, whether it was for a ride to the airport or for a ride to In-N-Out. I liked Uber SO much better. After transferring to Kutztown, I would talk about how much I loved and missed Uber, sometimes so much that I thought that they should be paying me. I feel guilty for liking Uber better than a company that does the same thing that has pledged to donate $1,000,000 to the ACLU.

I don’t use Uber at all in rural Pennsylvania, but I still could not bring myself to delete the app despite the implied racism, sexism, and Trump-supporting of the company. And to be honest, I’m ashamed of it. It’s all around me (well, maybe not in the middle of Pennsylvania) and it’s just so convenient. It would be hard to get around in some cities as a tourist or a citizen without Uber, just like it would be hard to stop shopping at Marks and Spencer in England. I wish it weren’t true, but it’s way too easy to sacrifice your beliefs for convenience in a capitalist society; it’s so easy to look the other way.

Social Media and its Movements


The next book that we’ve started to read in class is called Media and Social Justice and is a collection of articles by a variety of different writers. The introduction, “Media, Democracy, Human Rights, and Social Justice” by  Sue Curry Jansen, one of the editors, recounts  some of the history of the ways that the media has become a means to advocate for social justice, some of which is strikingly similar to the journalistic history discussed in the beginnings of Barlow’s Rise of the Blogosphere.

One of the ideas that Jansen highlights is the fact that different forms of social media “have played crucial roles in organizing social justice movements and rallying mass support for social change” (6). If you’ve read any of my previous posts, I’m sure this sounds pretty familiar and somewhat repetitive, but I think the fact that this idea keeps showing up is a testament to just how true it is. If it weren’t for Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and the Internet as a whole, social movements like Black Lives Matter and the organization of marches and protests would not exist, at least would not exist as they are today.

Furthering this point, Jansen also says that “Without a free, open, diverse, and robust media, democratic social change is virtually impossible” (7), and she is right. This quote made me think about not only the importance of said media, but also of those that are currently trying to limit it. Whether or not our president is even self-aware enough to consciously try to take down the media for this reason is another story altogether, but the fact of the matter is that he is trying to pit the American people against the media. He, kind of ironically, takes to social media to express his so eloquently-worded opinions:

enemy of the peoplefake news 5

When a person that has as much power as he does calls the media, who, by the way, has a constitutional right to share information, the “enemy of the American people,” many people will believe them, thus helping to stop the “social change” that Trump so badly wants to avoid from happening.

We Found It In the People

Sarah Jaffe’s Necessary Trouble: Americans in Revolt is a book in which recent (and I mean really recent) political and social movements and events are recounted and analyzed through her unique journalistic eye – she embeds herself in the movements that she writes about. While the movements that she includes are recent, such as Occupy Wall Street and the Wisconsin Protests of 2011, they are not as recent as the movements that were sparked by the outcome of the last presidential election.

I am, of course, referring to the Women’s March on Washington and the over 600 (!!!!) sister marches that took place all over the world on January 21, 2017. The way that the Women’s Marches began is extremely similar to how many of the movements that Jaffe writes about started.


Photo by: Kimika Ying, “Women’s March on Washington,” (CC BY 2.0) via flickr

As I wrote about briefly in my first post, Chapter One of Necessary Trouble, called “Banks Got Bailed Out, We Got Sold Out,” highlights some of the earlier movements that Jaffe talks about, ones that I have less of a memory and understanding of. She recounts the rise of the Tea Party during the beginning of Obama’s presidency. They were angry about the state of the American economy. Interestingly, the rise in awareness for the need of a women’s movement began almost immediately after Donald Trump won the election. Like the Tea Partiers were angry, we were, and still are, angry about many things that have happened after the election and subsequent inauguration of a new president.

Jaffe says how at the beginning of the Tea Party movement, “loose networks formed around Twitter hashtags” (23). This is not uncommon among social and political movements during an era in which technology and social media play such a large part. One of the most notable hashtag histories in recent movements is that of Black Lives Matter.


Photo by: Gerry Lauzon, “Black Lives Matter,” (CC BY 2.0) via flickr

Alicia Garza, one of the co-founders of the movement, came and spoke on my campus last semester and it was WONDERFUL. She said that the defining hashtag of the movement stemmed from a Facebook post that she posted after the acquittal of George Zimmerman. What started out as a “loose network” would transform into a monumental movement of which the hashtag would play an integral role.

Though there were (and still are) several hashtags associated with the Women’s March, most of what I saw from the beginnings of it was on Facebook. It seemed to me that many of the sister marches were organized through Facebook events that people would show interest in or RSVP to; I RSVP’ed to the Women’s March on Philadelphia Facebook event. I felt like I saw so many friends on my timeline RSVPing or showing interest in different marches around the country – friends near New York City, friends near Los Angeles, friends near Trenton, friends near Chicago, you get the idea.

As the Marches drew nearer, I noticed several hashtags being used: #WomensMarch (simple but effective), #WhyIMarch, and #IMarchFor, just to name a few. The last two were started to give marchers a way for them to share the various reason as to why they decided to marching, or, if they could not attend the march, why they were in support of it. The hashtags, as you can see by clicking on each, are still active today (which might have something to do with the fact that it is, as I write this section of my post, International Women’s Day). They’ve been a way for supporters of the movement to voice opinions, concerns, and thoughts.

A movement that I write about in my second post also utilized a hashtag during its organization and protests. The Wisconsin protests of 2011 the Jaffe writes about in Chapter Four, “Challenging the Austeritarians,” used the hashtag #wiunion and it is still somewhat active some six years later. Just as protesters are now, the protesters of the


Photo by: Fibonacci Blue, Minnesota rally in solidarity with Wisconsin union protesters, (CC BY 2.0) via Google Images

Wisconsin protests utilized Twitter and other social media platforms like YouTube and Facebook. I think this is especially important when, unlike the Women’s Marches was, a movement is contained to a specific, somewhat small area. By sharing posts and videos of protests on Facebook or Tweeting hashtags, the citizens of Wisconsin were able to get the word out about the injustice they were facing. People across the country stood in solidarity with them, like the people in the picture above, who were protesting in Minnesota.

Social media has, like I’ve mentioned before, become such a big part of social movements, especially ones as large and monumental as the Women’s March. There is a Facebook page, a Twitter, and even an Instagram!! The continuation of these platforms after the actual event, like the hashtags, is a way for the network to stay connected, educated, and to become even larger than before. There have been actions organized, like today’s A Day Without a Woman, to stand in solidarity with other marginalized groups and to fight against the hateful rhetoric the current administration is continuing to promote.

When Jaffe is discussing the protests in Wisconsin, she recounts the experience of a protester named Jenni Dye, the daughter of a teacher. Jaffe quotes Dye remembering a protest sign: “He had this big bushy Wisconsin beard and a winter hat on and his jacket was green and his sign said, ‘All the faith that I have lost in the government I have found in the people'” (102).

That single quote is the one line in Jaffe’s book that has resonated with me the most. It rings true for me and I would say that it rings true for many others, as well. In the aftermath of the election that caused so many people to lose faith in our government, the way that so many people have come together to fight and to support and to stand in solidarity with each other is absolutely incredible. Actually, “incredible” isn’t even a word that does it justice. The atmosphere and energy of the March in Philly was a testament to this statement; so many people of all genders and races and colors that had so obviously lost faith in the government seemed to find it again in those that they were marching beside.

Though no signs that I saw resonated with me quite like the one Dye describes, they were awesome. I’ve included my own pictures of some of the best ones that I saw in a slideshow  over to the right side of my blog, but one of my absolute favorite signs was the one that I’ve included below, a play on the Radiohead album title Hail to the Thief:


Photo by: Sara Nicotra

More Necessary Trouble

The final section of Jaffe’s Necessary Trouble focuses on events that have happened much more recently, ones that I can (mostly) really remember details of. Specifically, towards the end of Chapter Seven, called “Red Scares and Radical Imagination,” Jaffe writes about one of America’s favorite grandpas: Bernie Sanders.


Photo by: Adrienne Campbell, “IMG_0844,” (CC BY 2.0) via flickr

Just look at that grin!!

I did know that Bernie was popular among many people my age, but I was surprised to read about just how popular he was, even among older young people. Jaffe states that “by mid-March 2016, more voters under the age of thirty had chosen Sanders than both Clinton and Republican front-runner Donald Trump combined” (211). Despite the stereotype of Bernie supports as being entitled millennials that just want free college, those that aren’t considered millennials and are most likely out of college were feeling the Bern as well. From what I saw, Bernie and his presence in the election encouraged young people, “some even too young to vote in the 2016 election” (211), to become politically engaged, which I think sets the stage for political and social movements to come.

As Jaffe puts it in her book, Bernie “entered the Democratic primary calling for a ‘political revolution'” (210). Even though Bernie lost the primaries, I do believe that his campaign helped spark somewhat of a political revolution. In the aftermath of his loss, we are seeing many people speak up and are seeing movements that are making history. Obviously this cannot attributed only to the running of Bernie for president, but I think it does have something to do with how many young people are deciding to get involved with movements like the Women’s March, voicing their educated opinions on social media, and starting conversations about topics and issues that they are passionate about.

Jaffe quotes Brett Banditelli, an organizer of People for Bernie: “We wanted to inspire people not to support Bernie Sanders, but to use his platform as a way to support themselves. It had less to do with electoral politics and more to do with community organizing” (211). I think that’s exactly what we needed, especially considering the outcome of the election; communities are organizing like never before.

What Was Up in Wisconsin?

Up until a few months ago I had absolutely no idea that the Wisconsin protests of 2011 even happened. I was 15 and I wasn’t very active on social media yet; I guess I also didn’t really know about or understand social movements, especially those that were going on miles and miles away from where I live. This protest was huge, and yet I didn’t hear about it until years after it happened. I mean, look how many people showed up at the state Capitol building:


Photo by: Ryan O’Hara, “Protest,” (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) via flickr

The first I heard about the Wisconsin protests was last semester in a class with the same professor that I am taking this class, Activists Writing Media, with. We read a little bit about it, but I didn’t completely understand it, or how the people of Wisconsin felt about it, until reading Jaffe’s book. Chapter Four, called “Challenging the Austeritarians,” discusses just that.

Most recent social movements rely heavily on social media, either to help start up or to spread the word and connect people from all over. Social media took a large part in the starting of Black Lives Matter and the planning and set up of the Women’s Marches that took place on January 21st, 2017. Upon researching the implications that social media had on the Wisconsin protests, I found that, even though hadn’t seen it on any social media, people were using different platforms, specifically Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, to their advantage.

Facebook was used largely to plan the protests and there were many groups for people to join to show their support. It was also used to help circulate pictures and videos from the protests. Likewise, in a world before live streaming was as prevalent as it is today, protesters turned to YouTube to share videos of the protests. Like, Black Lives Matter, this movement had its own hashtag, too: #wiunion. The hashtag is still somewhat active now, six years later. It seems as though most people involved with social media during the protests were the protesters, but I did find that others turned to social media to show both support and criticism towards the unions and the protesters.

Necessary Trouble

So we just started reading the second book for our class: Sarah Jaffe’s Necessary Trouble: Americans In Revolt. I just want to start off by saying that Sarah Jaffe seems like a super cool (and smart as hell!!) woman that I would want to eat dinner or get coffee with.

In this book, Jaffe gets political and recounts recent social movements. Like, really recent. The book was published in 2016, so I can actually remember some of the movements that she’s brought up so far. The first big thing I noted about the book, however, I noticed before I even cracked it open. The cover of her book is a bright school bus yellow accented with some hot pink text and a hot pink map outline of the United States. The cover design and her choice of color is so obnoxious in the absolute best way possible.


Photo by: Sara Nicotra

As you may be able to tell  by the design of this blog, pink is my favorite color. It always has been and it probably always will be. However, pink is not a color that is often, or ever, associated with political discourse (it’s usually red or blue), or, I would argue, even intelligence. Maybe it’s because it’s a traditionally feminine and girly color, but the color pink, I think, is not taken seriously. I LOVE Jaffe’s use of the bright, obnoxious, hot pink on the cover and also love how she carries it and her in-your-face personae through the book’s website and her Twitter.

I was hesitant to make part of my blog pink, a color that I like and think reflects who I am, because I didn’t want it to take away from any credibility that I might have. But hey, if Jaffe can do it for her politically charged book then I can do it for my blog.

As far as the actual content of the book goes, I’m finding it extremely interesting and I love her style of writing. She frames the events as a narrative that makes it easy to read and it makes me want to read what she has to say.

The first chapter, called “Banks Got Bailed Out, We Got Sold Out,” Jaffe writes about the rise of the Tea Party, which, to be completely honest, I knew almost nothing about even though I knew what it was. In her description of the early days of the movement, I noticed some similarities between the Tea Party and other recent movements, specifically Black Lives Matter. Jaffe explains how “loose networks formed around Twitter hashtags” (23). That is literally how BLM got started – with a Twitter hashtag. Well, technically it was a Facebook hashtag first, but still.

She also says that “the Tea Party wore their anger on their sleeve. Often, it was directed at the newly elected president, but it was also often aimed at local representatives who were not seen as being responsive enough” (25). Individuals that are involved in BLM are angry as hell and they have not been hiding it. African-Americans continued to be victims of police brutality and violence and no one with power was doing anything about it, they were not “being responsive enough,” and still aren’t.