Feminist Focus

by Helena Donato-Sapp

We are so proud of GLI alum Helena Donato-Sapp, a 16-year-old high school junior from Long Beach, California, who was recently invited to deliver the commencement address at Heritage University's Class of 2026 graduation ceremony. In her powerful speech, Helena spoke on the value of resisting diminishment across all of one's identities, the fierce act of pursuing education, and the generational impact of perseverance. She closed with an original poem titled "Resistance."

Read her full speech below.

Elders and members of the Yakama Nation on whose ancestral land Heritage University stands, members of the Board of Directors, President Gilmer and David Creel, faculty, staff, family guests, and most importantly graduates of the class of 2026, thank you for the honor of being you commencement speaker.

Even I will say that it is a bit unusual to have a 16-year-old high school junior as your university commencement speaker, but I stand here because of a specific value that is a deliberate choice for my two fathers and myself. That value might sound simple, but it has made a big impact on my short life. The value is that I will not be diminished, and I will not participate in my own diminishment.

I am a storyteller, and one of things I know deeply about storytelling is that when I tell my story, you see your reflection in it. And when you tell your story, I see my face in the mirror of your story as well.

True, there may be many differences between us, and we honor those differences. I am a 16-year-old dark Black girl who had a traumatic early birth with lots of medical complications and was diagnosed with four invisible learning disabilities during elementary school. I was adopted at birth by two gay fathers — my Dad and my Papa who are in the front row beaming with fatherly pride, and probably already crying. These parts of my identities have been reasons for society to try to diminish me with all its might.

So much of society is anti-Black and is determined to put me down and hold me down because of the color of my skin. I rarely ever saw honest Black stories and the fullness of Black experience in the curriculum of school. Too many teachers have expected less of me academically because I am Black.

Society is also ableist. I was required to get tested for disabilities when I struggled to read and write in elementary school. But when I did get tested, the school held those test results against me. Teachers lowered expectations. Educators were often impatient with me and only saw me as a problem body and a problem mind. And my peers bullied me from kindergarten through eighth grade.

There was also homophobia against my loving fathers, and so much sexism too. I had one especially bad experience at the end of 7th grade at the hands of three older 8th grade boys. They said such hateful things to me that would horrify and disgust you, but when my parents and I sought support from the school administrators, they were not equipped to give it and seemed unable to act! Their inaction validated those boys’ behaviors. It is a tough world, and it often feels designed to diminish us and beat us down.

I recognized early on that it would take my entire being to resist diminishment! I have been raised to hold my head up high with pride in all my identities, and I believe in taking the very things that others would diminish about us and lifting them up as our strengths. This is exactly why, on this day of your university graduation, we need to talk about resistance. Resistance is the gift we offer the world today in its time of need.

I stand here today as a youth scholar with multiple peer-reviewed publications on Black girlhood because I resist the diminishment of my Blackness. I stand here today as a multiple globally award-winning disability activist because I resist diminishment about my beautiful disabilities. I stand here today having just been awarded the Congressman Robert Garcia Youth Grand Marshal Award for the Long Beach, California Pride Parade — one of the largest and most significant LGBTQ+ celebrations in the entire United States because I am a proud ally and lift up the joy of being raised by a two-dad family. And I stand here today as a young woman who has written and spoken about the power and worth of women.

My message is to resist diminishment and to hold your head up high about every single one of your identities. 

I have been raised in the art of resistance, and I have many stories about my parents teaching me to resist diminishment. One of my favorite stories is about my eighth-grade graduation. In my small middle school, all the graduating eighth-graders got to give a short speech at graduation, and we worked on those speeches for months as part of a writing assignment in our English class. I poured my heart into that speech and was determined to lift up the educators who supported me and to name the few friends who were kind when so many were not. Our Principal insisted on sticking to her preferred speech template and, in my case, she kept editing OUT what I thought were the best parts, the parts that were genuinely me. She erased my voice so much that, when I got her final edited draft, it was empty of anything important to me.

I was very upset about her efforts to erase my voice. When graduation day came, there was a notebook with everyone’s speech in it, and we were supposed to take turns using the notebook. But my conscience refused to do that, and I could not participate in the diminishment of my own voice. You would be proud to hear that I got up on stage and, like a classic heroic rebel, literally pulled my original graduation speech out of my sleeve! And I read it with deep love and, you know what?  It brought the house down!

We MUST resist the hatefulness and diminishment of today’s world. I can tell you for sure that I am proud of you today because you committed to learning and education, and I truly believe that education is a powerful, POWERFUL act of resistance. When I look at the current state of our world — and I mean this globally and not only nationally here in the United States — when I look at the current state of our world I am horrified to see the efforts to dismantle education as a right for all people, and this is especially true for girls worldwide. Many powerful people do everything they can to deny the rest of us the human right to an education and to keep us uninformed. We know this is because they see the uninformed as easy to control.

Heritage University graduates of the Class of 2026, I see your bold and brave act of pursuing knowledge as an act of fierce resistance. In a moment, you will walk across this stage, and you will be harder to control because of what you have learned at Heritage University. Your degree also makes it harder to diminish you because your pride in what you have accomplished will not easily be taken away. To those so determined to keep you in the dark, a University degree is the ultimate act of resistance.

The fact that so many of you are first-generation college graduates deserves special acknowledgment. My Dad is a first-generation college graduate as well, and I have seen and felt first-hand what it means because, as a second-generation college bound student, there has simply been no question that I am going to a university. My Papa is a Filipino immigrant, and he comes from a family in the Philippines that had higher education degrees going back for generations. But as many immigrants experience, those degrees don’t often make it across the border as they are erased upon arrival. Many immigrants have to start over. This is why your graduation at Heritage University today is such a bold act of resistance — it has the power to impact your family for generations to come. For so many of you, the few steps you walk on stage today represent a much huge journey over borders and generations. This is your heritage. 

Yes, the world might still try to continue to diminish you and your multiple identities. Resist that. And don’t tear yourself down either and participate in your OWN diminishment. Resist that. Understand that your drive to be educated will impact generations. Embrace that.

It is true that you arrive at this stage today because of your commitment to reach this goal. It is also true that you got here because of the love of the staff, administration, and faculty at Heritage University. But let’s be honest. Many of you would not be here without the LOVE of family — in all its forms — who have flooded this place to see you walk on stage today. It is the love of family and its power over generations that gives us the pride to thrive in this world. So today, it is an act of resistance to reach out with one hand for your diploma, while on the other hold the hands of the family who helped you get to this day. This graduation ceremony honors the generations you brought with you to this stage. 

Hiding between the pages of an old book that had been on a dusty shelf and left unopened for decades, I found the 1949 announcement of my grandmother’s graduation from 9th grade — the highest grade she reached. She passed away less than a year ago and I miss her every day. I found out in that old graduation announcement that she was the secretary of her class. I discovered why yellow roses were her favorite flower when I read in that old program that their 1949 class flower was the yellow rose. And I read the 1949 class motto of that one-room schoolhouse:  Tonight we launch, where shall we anchor? 

And this brings me to the last act of resistance I want to speak of today. Know that you are ready to launch! It is an act of resistance to have the confidence to know that you are ready for what comes next. Self-worth is resistance. Know that you are more than enough and, armed with pride and certainty, you are bound for greatness!

I am a poet, and Dr. Gilmer was the first to honor that when he made me the Poet Laureate of the National Institutes for Historically-Underserved Students in 2019 when I was just 10 years old. Since then, I have won many poetry awards such as becoming the Youth Poet Laureate of my city of Long Beach, California, and a Runner Up for the Youth Poet Laureate of the Western Region of the United States. Dr. Gilmer has requested that I share an original poem today and isn’t that just like a Professor of English to give me an assignment on graduation day?!

I am a 16-year-old junior in high school and will soon take my first steps towards college just as you are taking your graduating step today. To say that I admire you is an understatement. You lead the path to my future. The poem I’ll close with speaks further about the graduation gift of resistance that we offer the world, and it is titled “Resistance.”

Resistance

Identity is resistance.

I decide who I am and how I name myself.

I will not be diminished.

I love all of my identities.

Memory is resistance.

I remember who loves me deep and pure.

I remember your smile and hugs,

and how you made me feel.

I remember how you championed me.

Imagination is resistance.

I dream a brave world of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Authentic self-expression is resistance.

Creativity is resistance.

Kindness is resistance in a brutal, barbaric world.

Music is resistance.

We use song to sustain our spirits,

to give us strength to go on.

My Spirit is resistance.

A Spirit that fights for dignity and humanity.

A Spirit unbroken by this political moment.

Our joy is resistance,

joy in the face of oppression.

Laughter is resistance.

Poetry is resistance.

Poetry is unpredictable and hard to control.

It calls out and talks back to inhumanity.

Poetry can’t be contained,

and that makes it dangerous.

Poetry is the nurse of abuse.

Our resistance is hidden in the rhyme.

Writing is resistance.

Words uplift and inspire,

and ink records and remembers.

Remembrance is resistance.

Friendship is resistance.

Allyship is resistance.

Friends and family 

give me space to speak and process, 

and I am safe in their arms.

They listen

and the listening heals me. 

Love is our forcefield.

Organized by the Haddon Fortnightly and The HMHS 50/50 Club

Article by Juliana Ralic

The Through A Woman’s Eyes Art Show is an annual event since 2017 that takes place in Haddonfield, New Jersey. The show raises money for different organizations across the globe that help young girls gain access to safety and education each year through Girls Learn International (GLI). From girls in high school to senior citizens, women from Haddonfield and surrounding areas get a chance to display their art and support an incredible cause. Organizing the show is a process that the officers and the advisor of the club collaborate on with the women who run The Haddon Fortnightly, for about 5 months leading up to the show. It gives the new officers every year a chance to learn more about how to organize public events and handle leadership roles. It is an educational and rewarding experience for everyone involved, and knowing that the show is going to help more young girls be safe and educated is the most rewarding of all. In my personal experience, I have learned so much about the complexities of organizing an event like this and also, I have learned new aspects of countries I was not very familiar with before and what life is like for women and girls in those countries. This year, we sponsored the Unatti Foundation which is a group home for girls in Nepal. I was previously unaware of how life was for girls and women who live there, but by connecting with this organization, I, along with my fellow officers, got to learn about the hardships that many young girls face in Nepal regarding education, community, and safety. I am so grateful to have had the opportunity to not only connect women within my community, but also help other girls across the ocean gain access to safety. In our 2026 art show, we have raised $3,400 which gets us to our goal of over $20,000 dollars raised collectively since the art show began. Overall, it is a long but rewarding process, and a positive experience in the end for everyone involved.  

by Hellen Lunkuse W. Tanyinga, Founder & Executive Director, Rape Hurts Foundation (RHF), Busoga Region, Uganda

At the age of eleven, my childhood was shattered by a violent sexual assault while I was fetching water from a village well. The trauma of that night was compounded by the crushing weight of betrayal and injustice: my own father blamed me and attempted to force me into marriage with the perpetrator. It was my mother's courageous decision to flee with me that began my journey, a journey from victim to survivor, to advocate. This path has taught me that resilience is not merely about enduring pain, but about forging that pain into a purpose that protects and empowers others.

Today, as the founder of the Rape Hurts Foundation (RHF), I work in Uganda's Busoga region, an area where pervasive poverty, environmental degradation, and deeply entrenched patriarchal norms create a perfect storm of vulnerability for women and children. Our mission is multidimensional: to rescue, to heal, to empower, and ultimately, to transform the systems that allow such violence to persist. We do not see survivors as beneficiaries, but as the very architects of a new, equitable future.

The Unwavering Power of Survivor‐Led Advocacy

In our communities, advocacy is not an abstract concept, it is a lived testimony. When a survivor shares her story, she does more than recount an event; she challenges a culture of silence, dismantles stigma, and demands accountability from systems designed to fail her. At RHF, every initiative, from our confidential safe shelters to our comprehensive legal aid program, is built on a survivor-centered foundation.

Our approach recognizes that healing is holistic. A woman cannot recover from psychological trauma if she faces economic destitution; she cannot pursue justice if she fears for her safety. Therefore, we intertwine psychosocial counselling with tangible economic empowerment. Our legal officers, many of whom are also survivors, guide women through Uganda’s complex judicial system, while our vocational training centers provide the skills for financial independence. This model ensures that advocacy leads not just to awareness, but to actionable change and restored agency.

This ethos extends into the very fabric of our outreach. We have mobilized a grassroots network of 256 trained community volunteers, most of them survivors or allies from within the communities we serve. They act as first responders, educators, and unwavering pillars of support. They are the ones who intervene to prevent a child marriage, who stand beside a woman reporting a crime, and who lead dialogues challenging the harmful norms that condone violence.

Resilience as a Community Tapestry

In Busoga, resilience is a collective endeavor. It is woven from countless threads of daily courage and long‐term strategy. It is visible in our 800‐acre agro‐forestry project, launched in 2013, where women survivors of violence are now foresters, farmers, and environmental stewards. Together, we are planting a future, literally and figuratively, with a goal of 35 million indigenous trees by 2035. This work restores the land, secures food sovereignty, and symbolizes re‐growth after devastation.

Resilience is equally present in the hum of our Bukyerimba Vocational Skilling Center. Here, young women who were once deemed vulnerable master trades in tailoring, carpentry, ICT, bakery, and entrepreneurship. With each skill learned, they break a link in the chain of dependency and build a new narrative of self-sufficiency.

Yet, resilience also lives in the quieter, profound moments: a teenage girl attending school consistently for the first time because she has access to reusable sanitary pads from our production unit; a mother finding the strength to testify in court, supported by our legal team and her survivor peers; an entire village feeling safer after the installation of solar‐powered street lights, a direct response to the dangerous darkness that shadows women's daily chores.

Youth Engagement: Seeding the Future of Feminism

True, sustainable change cannot happen without the passion and perspective of the next generation. If survivor advocacy is our voice and community resilience our backbone, then the engagement of youth is undeniably our beating heart and our greatest hope.

Understanding this, we launched the “Girl‐Child Renaissance” Initiative, an ambitious five‐year program designed to reclaim the potential of 50,000 girls who have been forced out of school. Through full scholarships, dedicated mentorship, and leadership development, we are doing more than reinstating enrollment; we are cultivating a powerful cohort of young feminist leaders who understand that their education is an act of resistance and their voice a tool for revolution.

The initiative is intentionally intersectional. We are training 5,000 Girl‐Child Environmental Ambassadors, young women who connect the dots between climate crisis and gender‐based violence. They lead tree‐planting drives while educating their peers on how environmental scarcity increases risks of sexual assault and exploitation. Furthermore, we are building a 500‐member Girl‐Child Democracy Corps, inspired by principles of transparent governance. These young activists are being equipped to monitor local services, hold leaders accountable, and ensure that the priorities of girls and women are reflected in community decision‐making, a space from which they have been historically excluded.

A Call for Intersectional Feminist Solidarity

Our work is rooted in the conviction that effective feminism must be inclusive, intersectional, and unwavering in its practicality. It must confront the stark reality that a girl’s journey for water can endanger her life, that a woman’s lack of land rights make her susceptible to exploitation and that ecological collapse deepens gender inequality.

To the readers of Feminist Focus, especially the student leaders and emerging activists connected with GLI, I offer this reflection: Your advocacy has a ripple effect that transcends geography. Your focus on reproductive justice, climate action, and anti‐trafficking breathes energy into global movements and validates the struggles of those of us on the frontlines.

We at RHF do not labor in isolation. We stand alongside pro bono lawyers, dedicated health workers, reform‐minded government officials, and a global network of allies. But we work ultimately for a future where our interventions are obsolete, a future where every girl can walk to her water source, sit in her classroom, and dream of her destiny without a shadow of fear.

That future is not a fantasy. It is being constructed today, in Uganda’s Busoga region, by survivors who turn pain into power, by young women who lead with brilliance and bravery, and by all of us who choose solidarity over silence.

About the Author

by Brooke Soderbery

Think back to the last history or government class you took, whether that be a world history course or Advanced Placement (AP) United States History. Out of every figure you studied in your class, how many of them were women? If you’re like the vast majority of students in America, then it’s more than likely that there was an intense disparity between the representation of women and men. In 2017, the Smithsonian studied history standards across the nation and found that out of 737 historical figures named, only 178 were women. 

This phenomenon is very present in current AP courses. For example, in the AP United States Government course, none of the nine foundational documents required for students to learn were written by women, and none of the fourteen required Supreme Court cases address topics of women’s equality. When my AP teacher, Serene Williams, saw that Reed vs. Reed was an optional aside in the AP Gov course reader, she asked the question, “Why are women a sidebar?” 

Williams, along with another AP teacher, Kristen Kelly, received Harvard University's Schlesinger Grant in 2022. They intended to use the resources provided to expand the existing AP curriculum. Upon immersing themselves in all the documents and materials at the Arthur and Elizabeth Schlesinger Library on the History of Women in America, though, they soon realized that the sheer amount of information present called for the creation of an entirely new, standalone course—Women’s AP United States History (WAPUSH). Three years later, along with a team of students that I’m now leading, they’re lobbying the College Board to try and pilot the first national women’s history course in classrooms nationwide. 

When I introduce this campaign to new people, there are a couple of common questions I always get. The first is usually, “Why can’t you just add it to the existing course?” As I alluded to in the paragraph above, any AP student could tell you, and I can attest from personal experience, that current AP courses are already so jam-packed with information that it would be nearly impossible to try and add information that fully represents all the nuances of the roles women have played in history to an existing course. In fact, some AP teachers have discussed the idea of splitting all of the current content of APUSH into two year-long courses. One AP teacher wrote that APUSH was an outdated “race against time” to finish content, and many classes don’t finish all of the course’s required content. It’s not possible to fully teach women’s history within the confines of a current course, especially if we want to depict the true diversity of women in U.S. history, both in ideology and identity. 

Another common question I get is, “Why women’s history?” To this, I give A LOT of responses. To start, it’s important to be able to see yourself in your classes. Simply hearing about other women in my classes over the past few years from Williams and Kelly made me endlessly more interested in the subject, to the point where I’m now considering majoring in history. Beyond just the importance of representation there, women’s history in America is also just rich, complex, and compelling, and deserves to be taught in the classroom— the stories of Madame Restell, Pauli Murray, and so many others should be told. Their stories also give us important lessons that are incredibly relevant today. History is essential to progress, so if we want to make change for everyone, we need to teach about everyone. 

Learning about women’s history has allowed me to understand so much better what it means to be a woman in America. It’s additionally empowering to be able to see all the efforts made to be able to give me the right to speak up and take up space, and that fact motivates me to take risks and be bold. I hope that a nationwide women’s history course would be able to give other girls the opportunity to access that source of courage. And while it is just as important to be able to see yourself in your classes, it is also important to learn about the histories of people different from you, to shrink the growing empathy gap. Thus, this course is important for male students to be able to take as well.

by Helena Donato-Sapp

I excitedly shook my representative’s hand on Capitol Hill after preparing for my advocacy pitch for months.  I didn’t get here by accident; I got here through intentional coalition building.

As a youth activist, I build coalitions with organizations like the National Education Association and my work reinforces that we need to work together for a more just world.  Coalition building is essential for young activists to understand as early in our advocacy lives as possible.  To build coalitions requires the strategic process of forming alliances between diverse groups, organizations, or individuals to collectively achieve common goals.  When we pool our resources with others, we increase our expertise and influence and can achieve a greater impact than we could alone.  

I discovered The Feminist Majority Foundation (FMF) on the day my auntie – activist Monica Ramirez – received the Feminist Majority Women’s Global Rights Award in 2021.  On the same day I met Dolores Huerta, Nina Shaw, Adama Iwu, Elizabeth Nyamayaro, Kathy Spillar and Ellie Smeal.  As an 8-year-old third-grader, I saw two teenage girls from Girls Learn International (GLI) speak at that event and I wanted to be like them.  To achieve my goal, I reached out to Ashley Steimer-King, the GLI Director, who encouraged me to create my own GLI club at my middle school.  I started the school year strong as president of the GLI Charter and garnered support from the school administration for two years.  As a club, we developed and implemented a yearlong school-wide anti-bullying campaign informed by our club members’ experiences with years of exclusion and bullying.  In my earliest days of youth activism it was about showing up and serving in any capacity I could find.  I went to many events as a participant, then as a volunteer, and eventually took on beginning roles like starting a school club with that organization.  I believe you begin by being present and being of service.

In sixth-grade I also became a reporter for a pre-teen feminist magazine called New Moon Girls and I continued to grow in my agency and voice.  In seventh-grade I applied to be a blogger for The Feminist Focus, the official blog of GLI and I was one of six girls chosen! I wrote about remembering and honoring the history of hatpin feminism, I shared how to have a feminist holiday, and I published some of my poetry there for the first time (I’m now an award-winning Youth Poet Laureate).  It was an honor to write about my Aunt Monica and her work with the Humans Who Feed Us.  After that year I wanted to stay on the Blog Team longer and so I pitched to GLI leadership that I stay another year as a Senior Blog Team Writer/Editor and, as is typical of such a supportive organization, they thought that was a great idea.  I asked GLI leadership if I could volunteer for the 2023 Global Women’s Rights Awards and got to spend a day helping get the event staged, welcomed guests to their seats, met another teen volunteer and made a new friend, and got to see more fierce feminists like Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi.  As I matured in my advocacy, I began to think about how I could use my skills, like in my case my love of writing, to add to organizations’ platforms.  

As I continued my journey of showing up, servicing, participating at beginning levels in various organizations, I noticed that I had a passion for a certain topic and my activist stance began to get more focused on that singular issue.  Among many aspects of the work of Girls Learn International is the access to equitable education.  “Everyone, regardless of income level or background, should have equal access to a high-quality education."  This is personal to me as a Black disabled girl in America’s public school system.  GLI notes that U. S. Black girls are suspended from school at seven times the rate of their white peers.  And it’s even worse if you’re a Black and disabled girl like me as research verifies that we have higher school suspension rates than white disabled girls.  My personal activist work has become focused on Disability Justice and I am a sought-after keynote speaker on this topic and speak to thousands of educators each year about disability rights and inclusion.  I have partnered for the last three years with The National Education Association, the nation’s largest labor union with over three million members, and co-founded a campaign called “Become a Champion for Disability Rights and Inclusion.”  

My relationship with GLI led to an invitation in May of 2025 to apply to become a Youth Advocate with theGlobal Coalition for Education-US (GCE-US).  GCE-US’s mission is to promote education as a basic human right and mobilize to create political will in the U.S. and internationally to ensure universal quality education, which is at the core of all human development.  The NEA is also a partner of GCE-US.  I applied and was accepted into this extraordinary program and offered opportunities to be trained on how to be a lobbyist and advocate for quality education.  Eight young women from around the country were selected and received four intensive trainings on strategic and persuasive communication skills, on the difference between advocacy and activism, and on legislative and appropriations processes.  We flew to Washington, DC and on July 15th we went to Capitol Hill to lobby for GCE-US and quality education.  Our group lobbied in the offices of Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA-42), Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA), Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA), Rep. Michael Simpson (R-ID-2), Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID), Rep. Keith Self (R-TX-3), and Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX).  We advocated for three issues:  (1) Funding for international basic education, (2) Supporting foreign assistance for children, and (3) for our representatives to join the Bipartisan Basic Education Caucus.  Our team included Lara from Texas, Divine from Idaho, and me from California. 

Walking the halls of Congress and the Senate was unbelievable.  We moved through the underground tunnels to move between buildings and saw the passageways filled with young people who were really part of the great political experiment of democracy.  Each office we visited received us with a beautiful welcome, offering a different glimpse of American politics than the horribly divided view I see on the national news.  Here were representatives who met us with kindness and welcomed our concerns.  We felt like we were making a difference.  From office to office we grew more confident each time we lobbied and our delivery and message got more powerful each time.  Personally, I used the experiences I have had with GLI, NEA, and the GCE-US to blend a message of inclusivity around the key topic of making sure that all children have the opportunity for a quality education.  I am a 16-year-old junior in high school and I have lobbied on Capitol Hill with Congress and the Senate for quality education and my voice matters.  That seems like an extraordinary thing to be able to state, to be honest with you.

This experience has taught me three key lessons.  

First, I see the power of coalition building in the work of justice as the most important element of being a participatory democratic citizen.  Powerful change comes from powerful coalition building.  

Secondly, when you do find a specific issue that you feel especially passionate about, look to the organizations you have built relationships with and see how your passion intersects with their work already.  Ask yourself, “How can we work together to make a greater impact?”  My work with GLI led to GLI leadership inviting me to apply for the Youth Advocate position with GCE-US.  And my work with The NEA doubled the power of my message on Capitol Hill.  

Thirdly and last of all, our work for justice is deeply personal and part of what energizes us are the one-on-one relationships we build along our paths.  I am deeply moved by my relationship with the other young women in our team and have stayed in touch as we continue to advocate across states and across issues.  These relationships with organizations who partner and with other young people across so many intersectional identities strengthens all of us and I am certainly the better for this.  My work is strengthened and recharged with the collective energy from this experience. 

I recently spoke at an event about racial healing in Los Angeles and I broke down and cried at the stress of politics in America during my speech.  These are tough times, to say the least.  America seems more divided day by day and all I hear in the news is hatefulness and division.  But I know better because I have walked the halls of government now, have spoken to open and caring representatives across political parties and ideologies, and have seen peers with brilliance and passion tell their stories as a way to connect to others.  There is hope in youth advocacy, in the coalitions we build together, and in listening to each other.

By Brooke Soderbery

Visitors to Muir Woods National Monument over the past four years have been greeted with a curious sight—a collection of sticky notes attached to signage, adding additional historical context and details. This was part of the “History Under Construction” exhibit, where staff expanded the existing timeline available in the park “to tell the full story” of Muir Wood’s history. Notes included details such as the indigenous tribes who acted as stewards for the land, racist rhetoric used by park founder John Muir, and the efforts made by the women’s organization, the California Club, to save the park, among other content. 

In the past few weeks, this exhibit has become the first victim of Trump’s Executive Order 14253, “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.” The order calls on the Secretary of the Interior to ensure that parks and other federal institutions do not contain contents that “disparage Americans past or living (including persons living in colonial times).” Instead, they should “focus on the greatness of the achievements and progress of the American people or, with respect to natural features, the beauty, abundance, and grandeur of the American landscape.” Trump’s justification for the order is to quell the purported liberal revisionist movement that portrays America as “inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed.” 

Senator Jim Banks defended the Executive Order, publishing a statement proclaiming “our monuments should celebrate our founders and tell the story of what makes America great, not push woke talking points to please radical activists.” The American Historical Association, on the other hand, published a statement claiming that the order “completely misconstrues the nature of historical work,” emphasizing that their “goal is neither criticism nor celebration; it is to understand—to increase our knowledge of—the past in ways that can help Americans to shape the future.” 

The National Park Service has now removed all of the signage in Muir Woods. In an emailed statement to SFGATE, former park ranger and contributor to the exhibit Elizabeth Villiano expressed, “To me, the biggest irony is that the Trump administration says it wants to tell a more balanced version of history, and that’s exactly what this sign did. It didn’t remove anything. It just layered in what had been missing.” Reflecting upon the real meaning of the order, she added that “They’re trying to take away any nuance of history that might be a challenge to power.”

The fact that the first exhibit to be changed under this order is titled “History Under Construction” to illustrate the ongoing process of including marginalized narratives in public history is deeply ironic. It’s as if someone were midway through a home renovation and then suddenly decided to undo everything that had been changed. Is there a better way to represent the backsliding under the Trump Administration than the physical removal of diverse histories to return to a one-dimensional depiction of the past? A message on the sign previously read “everything on this sign is true but incomplete” to show the importance of seeing history through multiple angles. Notes added context to certain figures, such as how a former Chief of the US Forest Service was also a eugenicist. Visitors to the park will now only see his accolades.

While Muir Woods is the only park or monument so far to have had signage physically changed, many other parks have had content flagged for review. A sign detailing the impacts of rising sea levels on animal habitats at Cape Hatteras National Seashore is being reviewed by the Trump Administration. An exhibit at Cane River Park that names slaves who were recaptured after escaping, and explains the violence they were subjected to upon recapture, was flagged. Information covering how indigenous peoples were held captive by the Spanish at Castillo de San Marcos National Monument may also be removed. The potential deletion of this sort of content shows how, in practice, following Trump’s instructions of removing information that “disparage Americans past or living” means suppressing Black and indigenous stories. To focus on “the beauty, abundance, and grandeur of the American landscape” is to remove discussion of how those landscapes are under threat.

Part of a Broader Agenda

This attack on our nation’s parks and museums is part of Trump’s broader agenda to rewrite history—to create an image of America that erases both the oppression and achievements of the many historically marginalized groups in this country. Part of his “Make America Great Again” agenda is portraying this illusion of a nostalgic golden era that must be returned to, ignoring that for many groups, those so-called golden eras were times of deep injustice and marginalization. As Historian Jefferson Cowie put it to NPR, he’s evoking for white men “the idea that somebody took your birthright and there’s some version of America we need to get back to.”

At the end of his first term as President, Trump commissioned the 1776 Report as a response to the “1619 Project,” a New York Times report that emphasizes the history of enslaved people as central to our nation’s story. The 1776 Report attempts to create a so-called “patriotic education” that eliminates such concepts as critical race theory and systematic racism. Trump also notably misquoted and misrepresented Dr. Martin Luther King, and portrayed James Madison and George Washington, both slave owners, as trailblazers for the abolitionist cause. 

On the first day of his second term, Trump expanded his revisionist goals to the LGBTQ+ community through the Executive Orders “Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing” and “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” The latter Executive Order instructed federal agencies to remove any messaging relating to “gender ideology,” which was defined as “the idea that there is a vast spectrum of genders that are disconnected from one’s sex.” Following that Executive Order, the National Park Service edited over 200 articles to remove references to transgender or queer people—to remove them from the historical narrative—and deleted over 100 articles from their website. They removed all references to transgender people in their history of the Stonewall Riot, amending LGBTQ+ to LGB.

Historian Wendy Rouse discovered, following the order, that her article “The Very Queer History of the Suffrage Movement” had been edited without her consent or any sort of notification to remove the terms “transgender, nonbinary, genderfluid, and butch” and all other discussions of gender. When she followed up with the National Park Service about said revisions, they informed her it was an attempt to follow “policies outlined in recent Executive and Secretarial Orders” and then deleted the article in its entirety. 

Other attempts to alter the historical narrative include a series of videos made for America's 250th anniversary titled “The Story of America,” which use the slogan “Make America Great Again” to draw parallels between Lincoln and Trump. Additionally, agencies flagged dozens of words, including “feminism,” to limit their use, and executive Orders, like “Restoring America's Fighting Force,” targeted military content. This order led to the removal of Pentagon webpages that highlighted the achievements of female and minority veterans, though the pages were eventually restored following a public outcry. Immediately after the publishing of the “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” Executive Order, a similar event occurred—Harriet Tubman’s profile on the National Park Service’s website was removed. The removal was reversed after public backlash, following the news that it was the work of an employee attempting to follow the order rather than the White House itself. 

Still, this demonstrates an uncomfortable pattern of the Administration trying to get away with erasing as much as possible, only reversing their work when faced with significant public pressure. What does that mean for the history that isn’t about famous figures or veterans? What does it mean for the stories that the public wouldn’t instantly recognize as missing? This question is especially important when we consider that much of the history being erased is about groups of people and narratives that have historically been excluded from the popular American story. The now-removed Muir Woods exhibit was meant to highlight the lives of the women, indigenous people, and other groups who had previously been overlooked in descriptions of the park’s past. As of 2017, a Smithsonian article reported that among the 737 historical figures included in history standards, only 178 women were included, and out of those 178 women, only one Asian American woman was added. As efforts are continually being made across the nation to exclude subjects of racial discrimination and LGBTQ+ identities from the classroom by Republican state legislatures, it appears that the public will only become less educated on the diverse histories being purged by the Trump Administration.

Looking upon all of these orders and policies as pieces of one agenda, it’s undeniable that the scope of Trump’s erasures is rapidly increasing. What began as a very public battle over how to cover slavery in the classroom has turned into an attempt to suppress any mention or inclusion of a historically marginalized person in the narrative of America’s story. At Muir Woods, just a few seemingly non-political sentences covering how women contributed to the park counted as illicit information. Given the escalation that has occurred over the last few months, it’s alarming to consider how much history may be erased within the next four years.

Not a New Phenomenon

Forceful efforts to alter the facts of history in America are by no means new. Current efforts by Trump, as well as at the state level, to remove discussions of racial oppression from the classroom are a continuum of efforts made in the late 19th and early 20th century in the South to create a version of history sympathetic to Confederate interests. During this period, Southern states created committees to review textbooks with the ability to force publishers to adopt certain changes or lose their contracts. In order to stay profitable, Northern publishers created textbooks for the South with an entirely different history of the Civil War. These eventually started to affect how Northern narratives were taught as well. For example, in Southern textbooks, John Wilkes Booth was portrayed as an insane, lone actor, his actions removed from Southern ideology and movements, while in Northern textbooks he was depicted as part of a broader Southern effort. But as the 1930s rolled around, textbooks nationally adopted the Southern version of the narrative.

In another example of suppressed histories, Wendy Rouse’s work outlining the queer history of suffragists—included in her now-deleted National Park Service article—is ironically made difficult by the historical efforts to hide any evidence of queerness. The respectability politics of the early suffrage era made it so those that openly expressed queerness or defied gender norms were pushed out of the limelight, and the queer relationships held by those in leadership were staunchly hidden. By the time of the Lavender Scare, any evidence of queerness in the suffragists, whether that be a photo or a letter to a lover, was intentionally destroyed. 

Reflecting on the parallels between past suppression and our current era, Rouse wrote that “When I talk about the erasure of this history and the difficulty of reconstructing the past from what little remains, most listeners express sadness and outrage. They question how such suppression could have happened ‘back then.’ This erasure is not something relegated to a dark and distant past. It is happening at this very moment.” She referred to how the Nazi’s once burned books with content covering queer and trans individuals—now, Trump is inciting a “digital book burning,” as dubbed by Historian Gerard Koskovich, amid efforts already to remove LGBTQ+ individuals from classrooms. 

Preserving History

Amidst this suppression, there are continuous efforts to preserve the histories targeted by the Administration. The “Save Our Signs” campaign, run by teachers, librarians, and historians out of the University of Minnesota, is building a digital archive of national parks content. They’ve called on the public to take pictures at parks and have already received hundreds of submissions. On websites like OutHistory, LGBTQ+ archivists and historians have transferred work previously housed on government websites to save it from being removed forever. Using the Wayback Machine, former NPS staff have made efforts to restore content removed for its inclusion of queer and transgender individuals onto the website Uncensored. Additionally, while information about LGBTQ+ histories, among other topics, may now be limited on government pages, there are a wealth of non-governmental websites and nonprofits that educate the public on diverse American stories. The Preserving Pauli Murray website, for example, is an amazing resource that works to ensure that the legacy of the trailblazing civil rights activist is not lost. 

by Brooke Soderbery

The word “unprecedented” is often featured in articles about the Trump administration, especially when discussing the administration’s assaults on the First Amendment. In just a few months, Trump has waged a war against higher education. He withheld billions of dollars of research grants from Harvard after the university refused to abide by demands to screen faculty, courses, and departments to ensure Trump’s version of “ideological diversity.” He has threatened to arrest and deport numerous foreign students for their political speech and participation in protests. He has engaged in lawsuits with the press over their coverage, as well as targeted certain media, such as the Associated Press, for continuing to use the term "Gulf of Mexico" instead of "Gulf of America," by banning them from accessing certain White House press events.

As a young person, it’s easy to view all of these events as entirely new battles over free speech—that this is all coming out of nowhere. I can hardly remember ever hearing about such drastic battles over civil liberties on the news at any other time in my seventeen-year-old life. Yet while it is certainly true that Trump has rapidly escalated attacks on free speech to a greater degree than has been seen for decades, fights concerning academic freedom, freedom of the press, and the rights of protestors, among other protections provided by the First Amendment, are by no means a recent phenomenon. Trump’s attacks should be viewed within the context of these prior cases.

The new, limited series by Ms. Studios, “Speaking Freely: a First Amendment Podcast with Stephen Rohde,” helps to explain and contextualize how our First Amendment protections were able to evolve into their modern form through different key fights and cases over the last century. Rohde, a First Amendment expert who’s been studying, writing about, and litigating the amendment for decades, traces how free speech has been expanded, limited, and fought for—how it’s become an essential element to our democracy.

In the first episode of the podcast, Rohde covers “Antiwar Protests on Trial.” The episode starts with an explanation of the foundational Schenk v. United States case, where Charles Schenk was charged for his actions in distributing thousands of fliers urging men not to submit to the draft. This violated the Espionage Act of 1917—a law passed during America’s entry into World War I that, along with the Sedition Act of 1918, “imposed severe prison sentences and fines on any speech or writing deemed disloyal towards the U.S. government,” according to Rohde. Schenk's case went to the Supreme Court, and in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, the Court upheld his convictions unanimously, finding that his actions violated the clear and present danger test given the circumstances of World War I and the need for mass mobilization of United States troops. Though the court notably thought Schenk’s actions would be protected under the First Amendment if he had been acting during peacetime. 

Interestingly, soon after, in Abrams vs. United States, where Jewish anarchists were charged with violating the Sedition Act of 1918 after printing leaflets condemning President Wilson for sending troops to Russia to work against the Russian Revolution, Justice Holmes dissented from the majority ruling upholding the charges. He believed that Abrams, unlike Schenk, was not interfering with the war effort. Justice Holmes then made the influential statement—introducing his theory of marketplace ideas—that, “the ultimate good desire is best reached by free trade and ideas. That the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon their wishes safely can be carried out.” This would lead to Whitney v. California, where Justice Louis Brandeis wrote in his concurring opinion that the founders “valued liberty, both as an end and as a means,” and that “the greatest menace to freedom is an inert people. That public discussion is a political duty, and that this should be the fundamental principle of the American government.” These principles finally became the law of the land in Brandenburg v. Ohio. Rohde explains that the Brandenburg Test has two conditions that must be met for speech not to be protected by the First Amendment: a speaker must be “actually trying to incite or produce others to commit a crime” imminently, and speech must be likely to “incite or produce unlawful conduct.”

In another episode, “Assaults on Academic Freedom,” Rohde covers how academic freedom protections under the First Amendment have become what they are today. He begins in the Red Scare era with Sweezy v. New Hampshire. The State of New Hampshire had passed legislation in 1951 that provided that, according to Rohde, “subversive persons could not be employed in state government,” including teachers and professors in public institutions, unless they made sworn statements that they weren’t subversive persons. Sweezey, a Harvard lecturer, refused to answer certain questions about his associates and his curriculum when asked to testify, leading to him being charged with contempt. The case went up to the Supreme Court, where the court ruled 6 to 2 in his favor, with Chief Justice Warren writing in his plurality opinion that “to impose any straitjacket upon the intellectual leaders in our colleges and universities would imperil the future of our nation. Scholarship cannot flourish in an atmosphere of suspicion and distrust. Teachers and students must always remain free to inquire, to study, and to evaluate, to gain new maturity and understanding. Otherwise, our civilization will stagnate and die.” 

Rohde, after finishing his explanation of the Sweezy case, then points out how the “fundamental principles underscored by Chief Justice Warren are not settled once and for all. They must be reaffirmed every time there is a new assault on free speech and academic freedom.” This can be seen in Keyishian v. Board of Regents, a case where Keyishian, an English instructor, refused to sign a New York-required certificate saying he was not a Communist, and because of that, did not have his contract renewed. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the New York laws violated the First Amendment, with Justice William J. Brennan Jr’s majority opinion reading, “our nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, which is of transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned. That freedom is therefore a special concern of the First Amendment, which does not tolerate laws that cast a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom. The classroom is peculiarly the marketplace of ideas. The nation’s future depends on leaders trained through wide exposure to the robust exchange of ideas, which discovers truth out of a multitude of tongues rather than through any kind of authoritative selection.” Rohde highlights how the case also relied on the principle that  “vague and ambiguous laws pose an unacceptable threat to freedom of speech and press,” as the Government cannot simply make sweeping regulations on speech with vague wording.

Many of the cases discussed in these two episodes, as well as in the other eight episodes not discussed in this article, pose uncomfortable parallels to our modern lives. The arrest of Schenk and Abrams for speaking out against World War I and United States foreign policy can easily be compared to the arrest of activist Mahomoud Khalil, whose presence allegedly has "potentially serious adverse foreign consequences, and would compromise a compelling U.S. foreign policy interest,” according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The laws imposed on academics prevented them from speaking about Communism in Sweezy vs. New Hampshire and Keyishian v. Board of Regents could be likened to legislation like Florida’s Stop WOKE Act, which was found by a judge to ban "professors from expressing disfavored viewpoints in university classrooms while permitting unfettered expression of the opposite viewpoints” and thus be unconstitutional. Trump’s attempts at regulating the curriculum of private colleges, by instituting third-party audits in certain departments, also mirror those restrictions.

by Beyla Patil

When someone enlists in the military, they’re warned of the dangers that come with wearing the uniform—the possibility of dying in combat. Still, there's a certain dignity in that sacrifice. What no one ever tells them, though, is that their greatest threat may not come from a foreign enemy, but from within their own ranks. No one warns them that they could lose their lives or their sense of self, not at the hands of a foe, but at the hands of their own compatriots. The powerful documentaries, The Invisible War and I Am Vanessa Guillen, reveal the internal horrors embedded in the military, demanding a cultural and moral shift in today’s society.   

Too often, the blood of the victims stains those entrusted with power and protection. Vanessa Guillen’s murder—at the hands of her supervisor after her reports of sexual harassment were ignored—stands as a harrowing example. Other times, the death is psychological. The trauma of rape, the demolition of trust, and the stripping of identity eternally alter the course of a survivor’s life. Gender-based violence in the military is extremely prominent, as “over 20% of female veterans have been sexually assaulted while serving” (The Invisible War 0:12:26). It has also been reported that “women who have been raped in the military have a PTSD rate higher than men who’ve been in combat” (The Invisible War 0:34:17). However, these are not just statistics, but a profound indictment of an institution that claims to value honor and sacrifice. 

This corruption of power is evident in the way survivors are treated. Sergeant Myla Haider recounts, “I was ordered to advise a victim of her rights for false statements when I knew that she wasn’t lying. I was asked to bring her and advise her of her rights like a criminal, and interrogate her for false statements, quote, and quote, ‘until I got the truth out of her’” (The Invisible War 0:21:54—0:22:09). Haider’s words reveal a system that punishes those who come forward, treating them as suspects rather than victims. She continues, “If a woman makes a rape complaint, there are always people asking what she was doing there, what she was wearing, whether she had a boyfriend or not” (The Invisible War 0:22:09–0:22:18). These reflexive suspicions go far beyond skepticism. It reveals an institution that's built on misogyny, leaving perpetrators protected and survivors isolated. 

The psychological toll of this betrayal is immense. Attorney, Burke PLLC observes, “What we hear again and again from soldiers who have been raped is that as bad as it was being raped, what was as bad, if not worse, was to receive professional retaliation in their chosen career merely because they were raped (The Invisible War 0:23:51—0:24:08). For many, the aftermath—the disbelief, the retaliation, the career destruction—is as devastating as the assault itself. The insidiousness of this culture is further exposed by the way women are coerced into not reporting. “I could choose to report it, but if they found out that what I was saying wasn’t to be truthful, then I would be reduced in rank,” says Rebecca Catagnus (The Invisible War 0:24:19—0:24:27). Another survivor recounts, “I reported it two different times to my squad leader and he told me that there is nothing he can do about it ‘cause I didn’t have any proof (The Invisible War 0:24:23—0:24:53). The threat of punishment and disbelief is so pervasive that “33% of servicewomen didn’t report their rape because the person to report to was a friend of the rapist” (The Invisible War 1:25:28). This is not just a failure of justice—it is a deliberate protection of power at the expense of the vulnerable. 

The normalization and acceptance of sexual assault is extremely heartbreaking. Ariana Klay, a survivor, reflects, “Just the other day, I saw a girl…she was wearing a U.S.M.C. t-shirt and I thought that if she joins then she’s gonna have to accept rape and destruction of her life” (The Invisible War 1:18:56—1:19:15). This unsettling acceptance arises not only from individual experiences, but of a culture where silence, denial, and complicity are embedded into daily life. By blindly adhering to those in power, we are sending an undeniable message to every woman who serves, leaving them to believe violence against them is inevitable, and silence is the price of survival. 

Change, when it comes, is rarely born of moral reckoning. It is forced by public outrage, by the courage of survivors who refuse to be silent, and by the relentless advocacy of families and activists. “I begged them from the beginning to look for my daughter. They never did it. Why, until now, are they making this show of searching for my daughter? Why now?” asks Vanessa Guillen’s mother (I Am Vanessa Guillen 0:31:40—0:31:43), exposing how institutions act only when their failures are exposed to the world. Only after Vanessa Guillen’s case became public did those in power even begin to bend an ear. Officials acted not out of righteousness, but out of fear for their own reputations and positions. This reactive approach underscores the need for change that is rooted not in self-preservation but in genuine accountability.

A feminist lens reveals how the epidemic of sexual assault in the military is not simply a crisis of policy, but a reflection of deeper power imbalances that place institutional reputation above the well-being of individuals. This perspective exposes how those with authority protect themselves by silencing the very people they should protect, enforcing that silence through intimidation, retaliation, and the suppression of survivors’ voices. When leaders and institutions minimize, dismiss, or cover up abuse, they make it clear that the safety and humanity of service members are secondary to maintaining the military’s reputation. Forced silence becomes another weapon, compounding trauma and isolating survivors.

by Hadassah Cohen

On January 29th, 2025, a new Executive Order titled “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling” was issued by the Trump administration. This order seeks to ban the use of federal funds for teaching what it labels as “discriminatory equity ideology”, a vague and politically charged term used to discredit education about systemic racism and gender identity. Behind this language lies a dangerous effort to distort the role that race and gender have played in U.S. history and erase the lived experiences of marginalized students. If enacted, the policy would silence conversations around identity and justice in classrooms, further harming students of color, girls, and transgender, nonbinary, and intersex students who already face disproportionate discrimination in schools. Even in the face of such regressive federal action, pushback is happening.. State leaders, educators, civil rights advocates, and community members across the country are rising up to protect inclusive and affirming education. Our resistance highlights a broader commitment: that every student deserves to feel safe, seen, and supported in the classroom. 

In response, a wave of state and local leaders have stepped up to defend inclusive education. Montgomery County Public Schools in Maryland issued a letter ensuring their commitment to equity and students' safety, rejecting the order's discriminatory implications. In California, the State Superintendent called out the Trump administration, pledging to protect students’ rights to learn in inclusive environments that promote their diverse histories and identities. Similar resistance has emerged across the country. Michigan’s Education Board passed a resolution condemning the executive order, calling it a direct attack on public education and marginalized communities. In Massachusetts, one city made headlines by declaring it a sanctuary for the transgender community, signaling a refusal to comply with policies that endanger LGBTQ+ residents. Students in Georgia scored a major victory when a coalition of civil rights groups successfully defeated SB 120, a state-level bill that sought to eliminate all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies and programs from Georgia’s K-12 schools and higher education institutions. These examples demonstrate how local and state leadership can act as a barrier against discriminatory federal policies, ensuring that schools remain places of refuge and belonging for all students. 

by Hadassah Cohen

In today's activist climate, nationwide and global movements captivate our screens and inspire crowds to fill the streets. Perhaps we watch from afar in awe, or perhaps we get involved in the marches that happen in our neighbourhoods. Nonetheless, we often overlook the work that goes into these protests, instead, focusing on the charismatic leaders and powerful speakers who capture public attention. However, behind every impactful rally, there is countless unseen work that makes it possible. Much of this invisible labour is taken on by young women who organise, coordinate and sustain movements without the same praise as their male counterparts. Understanding this dynamic is essential for building truly equitable change as it highlights the persistent gendered expectations that shape who is visible and valued in the fight for justice. 

Throughout history, women have been the backbone of social movements. The Civil Rights movement is a clear example of where women, like Ella Baker and Diane Nash, played critical roles in shaping the strategies and support that fueled the fight for racial equality. Baker was instrumental in founding the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), which became one of the most influential grassroots organizations of the 1960’s. Nash, another vital figure, was a driving force behind the Nashville sit-ins and the Freedom Ride summer that forced the country to notice the violence against African Americans. Despite their central roles in these dangerous undertakings, Nash and Baker’s contributions, like many of the women in the movement, were hidden by more visible male leaders. Men largely dominated the face of the Civil Rights movement, particularly when fighting to secure the Black male vote. While this struggle was necessary to dismantle systematic disenfranchisement, it often came at the expense of Black women’s political rights. Their right to vote and have a voice in the country’s politics was treated as a secondary concern. The ability to silence female voices has been shaped by traditional gender norms that have relegated women to “support” roles, such as coordinating logistics and maintaining morale. These critical but less visible tasks mirror the unpaid domestic labor that women have historically been expected to perform, supporting the notion that their contributions were less important. Yet, without this foundational work, these movements would have been unsuccessful. 

While the dynamics of activism have evolved over time, the expectation for women to handle behind the scenes labour remains a constant reality. In modern movements like Black Lives Matter, climate activism, and student organizing, women have been made to feel responsible for the critical, yet largely invisible roles they hold. Many women in the BLM movement have felt left out of decision-making processes, leadership positions and the overall narrative of the importance of Black lives. Despite being founded by three women, Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi, the BLM movement is often discussed by narratives that don't fully recognize their accomplishments. Their names have been lost in mainstream media despite them being the reason for a global racial justice movement. Furthermore, many young women in these spaces are expected to take on the emotional labor, acting as the glue that holds organizations together. They are the ones who remember to acknowledge the mental health of other members and ensure there is a strong sense of community. This emotional work, while less visible, is crucial for sustaining momentum over time. Women have always been reduced to the emotional caretakers, overlooking the fact that they can be that as well as the important spearheads. This dynamic not only silences their voices but also perpetuates the very hierarchies these movements seek to dismantle. 

This type of behind-the-scenes work that women have been performing in activist spaces mirrors the traditional roles they have been required to fulfill in their personal lives. Just as household tasks like cooking, cleaning and caregiving are essential but undervalued, they are equally as essential. Men delegate these jobs to women, believing it is beneath them, and rarely crediting them as being qualified for a leadership position. This dynamic not only devalues their work but also limits their opportunities for recognition and advancement, creating a cycle where their contributions are both relied upon but overlooked. 

by Hadassah Cohen

The word “feminist” carries a powerful history of women’s rights and gender equality, however it has become severely misunderstood and stigmatized in public discourse. For some, it represents a movement that calls to dismantle the patriarchy and level the playing field for men and women, but for others, it has been distorted into a term that equates to man-hating, privilege and exclusion. This polarization has been fueled by mainstream media and political rhetoric as well as high profile movements that have prioritized the voices of a white demographic over the diverse experiences of women globally. This lack of understanding has diluted the movement's impact. At its core, feminism is about dismantling systems of power and privilege that reinforce gender inequality; however the distortion of its meaning has impacted the movement negatively. 

Feminism has evolved over multiple “waves”, each one addressing the changing needs and priorities of the movement at the time. Early feminism emerged in the 19th century when activists like Susan B Anthony and Elizabeth Stanton fought for basic legal rights for women such as the right to vote, to own property, and to receive an education. These women laid the foundation for a rapidly expanding crusade. The second wave of feminism primarily took place in the 1960’s and 70’s, building upon the first wave’s focus on suffrage. It broadened the movement’s mission to include workplace rights, reproductive freedom and the passing of the Equal Rights Amendment. This era of feminism sought to dismantle the systemic inequalities that kept women economically and socially dependent on men. It was during this period that the slogan “The personal is political” was coined, highlighting that issues like domestic violence, reproductive rights and sexual harassment were not just private matters but in need of political action. As the third wave started in the 1990’s, women’s rights activists challenged the white, middle class focus of earlier feminism and aimed to create a mainstream movement that was inclusive of the various challenges women from different races, classes, and gender identities were facing. It marked a critical shift toward intersectionality which expanded the definition of womanhood and rejected binary definitions of gender. Lastly, the fourth wave feminism, which surfaced in the 2010’s, has been defined by digital activism like the #MeToo movement. This wave strategically incorporated the power of social media to expose systemic harassment and demand accountability from powerful corporations. It also pushed for a more inclusive, global feminism. 

Despite its diverse and inclusive roots, feminism has often suffered misconceptions that have distorted its purpose over time. One of the most common myths, created by the patriarchy, is that feminism is inherently anti-male. Men have often used this argument to undermine the movement, reducing feminists as being hostile and bitter. In reality, feminism challenges systems of power that harm all genders, including the sexist expectations of masculinity that often limits men’s emotional expression and reinforces toxic behaviours. Many young boys often distance themselves from the term feminist out of discomfort or even disgust, viewing it as a label that is “unmanly” or irrelevant. To them it has become a term that feels more like a social risk than a call for equality. Another widespread myth is that feminism is only for women, which ignores the fact that the movement also advocates for the rights and well-being of all genders. Additionally, feminism is often dismissed as being a Western concept, irrelevant to cultures that aren't white. While white feminism has often centered the discussion on feminism as a whole, true feminism fights for the liberation of all women, regardless of race, class or nationality. From the Aba’s Women’s War and the #EndSARS movement in Nigeria to the protests for women’s freedom in Iran, the global feminist movement has been a powerful force for change. Finally, some critics argue that feminism is outdated and unnecessary, claiming that women have already achieved equality in today's society. This is untrue in so many aspects. The gender pay gap, pervasive sexual violence, ongoing attacks on reproductive rights and restrictive laws like the SAVE Act, which disproportionately affects married women, proves that this work is far from over. Feminism remains as relevant today as ever. 

While feminism has made significant strides in advancing gender equality, it has often struggled to fully include the voices of women of color and LGBTQ+ individuals. This failure to address these groups is a critical blind spot within the movement. In a way, “white feminism” often dominates mainstream narratives, sidelining those who face multiple, intersecting forms of discrimination. For example, high profile campaigns like “Free the Nipple” as well as the smaller TikTok trend of dying armpit hair have gained significant media attention for challenging the sexualization of women’s bodies and promoting body positivity. However, this focus can seem out of touch compared to the more pressing issues that face marginalized women globally. Their struggles with violence, sexual exploitation and economic freedom become less of an urgent concern when overshadowed with these privileged issues. While body positivity is important, it becomes an issue when basic bodily autonomy for many women is not being spoken on. To be truly transformative, feminism must prioritize the voices and leadership of those who have been historically excluded, ensuring that the movement is reflective of the diverse experiences of all women. 

by Sofia Bocchino

Inspired by the prompt “If you had a meeting tomorrow with your representative about education, what would you tell them?” I reported on a goal I have to achieve equal and equitable funding amongst schools in my district, speaking to the importance of advocacy in regards to the education system. 

If I had a meeting tomorrow with my representative, I would tell them that access to adequate funding for institutions and their faculty is crucial for fostering positive development in students and their respective communities. I live in Clifton, which resides in New Jersey's 9th Congressional District and 27th Legislative District. As a student myself who works as a tutor and volunteer educator for workshops on specific areas of interest, I understand the importance of establishing an equitable and inclusive learning environment. Many of the students I work with are international, and do not have access to equal educational opportunities outside of external resources provided by Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). 

While the U.S. educational system operates with a distinct difference, teaching students who face an entirely different educational reality has provided me with perspective and shown me the importance of advocating for better funding even in my own district. While I have been fortunate to attend a private school in Hoboken, NJ that has been supportive of a neurodivergent student like myself, schools in my district have struggled to provide that level of equitability as a result of being underfunded. According to The Clifton Times, the Clifton school district has been underfunded by $450 million since 2008, leaving many of the elementary, middle, and high schools lacking resources and underpaying faculty. According to Niche.com, test score averages taken within the past several years reveal that 15% of students at Clifton High School are proficient in math while 29% are proficient in reading. Data collected by U.S. News also finds that over 46% of students enrolled at a school in the Clifton school district experience economic disadvantages. 

This data is important to communicate as it puts the district’s need for improved funding into perspective and shows the general disadvantages students and faculty face as a result. While I did not attend any schools in Clifton, I recognize the importance of advocating for my district, as I strive to create equal and equitable opportunities for my peers, students in my community, and youth across the globe. 

In this compelling interview, Madison Zhan, GLI Student Leader and advocate, speaks with Jocelyn Cho, a fellow student focusing on Title IX for SASH Club (Students Against Sexual Harassment). They discuss the importance of Title IX in preventing sexual discrimination and harassment in schools, and the need for better education around these policies. 

General Context and Policy Awareness

MZ: What specific policies do schools have in place to prevent sexual discrimination and harassment? JC: All schools in the U.S. are required to have trained Title IX Coordinators, counselors, and mandated reporters to protect students. The standard of training provided to staff and Title IX Coordinators varies tremendously. Some school districts have developed strong procedures to address sex discrimination, like the Berkeley Unified School District and Ashland, OR School District, after years of student and adult advocacy. Other districts may have a part-time Title IX Coordinator who occupies another job in the district.

MZ: How are students and staff educated about these policies? Are there regular trainings or workshops? JC: School staff are mandated to report to child welfare agencies or the police when they learn about incidents involving sexual abuse and other serious harms. School staff receive trainings and workshops, but because the content is not publicly available, it’s difficult to gauge whether their education is sufficient to support students. Due to widespread sexual harassment and assault by peers and school employees, it appears that staff education is either insufficient and/or not implemented. While students are offered intermittent discussions around sexual violence, harassment, and consent, they are typically held for a short period during health class or once a year during sexual assault awareness month. The level of education and depth varies from school to school.

MZ: What measures are in place to encourage victims to come forward without fear of retaliation? JC: Often, students do not know about measures to protect them from retaliation; for example, Title IX prohibits retaliation. While there are mandated reporters who must report incidents of assault to the authorities or counselors who console victims, not all students know that school staff are mandated reporters, as a result, this can cause more harm than good and force victims to confront the issue with the police or their families before they are ready or want to.

Student Experience and Awareness

MZ: How do students learn about their rights regarding sexual discrimination and harassment under Title IX? JC: Organizations like Stop Sexual Assaults in Schools (SSAIS) and SASH Club (Students Against Sexual Harassment) are dedicated to educating K-12 youth and adult allies about sexual harassment and assault, students’ rights, and how to obtain support. The National Women’s Law Center, Know Your IX, and Equal Rights Advocates are also excellent sources of information.

MZ: Have you noticed any cultural or systemic factors within the school that may contribute to gender-based discrimination? JC: From an early age, people who are female-identifying are conditioned to “be smaller” or “be quieter.” Male-identifying students are told to “provide,” “protect,” or “be a man” from an early age. These ingrained messages perpetuate stereotypical gender roles that hurt everyone.

Reporting and Response Protocol

MZ: How do schools handle reports of sexual harassment? Can you walk me through the process? JC: Schools should inform students and parents of the reporting process, for example, on their website and in their student handbooks. The Title IX Coordinator’s contact information must be easy to find. After reporting, students can receive supportive measures from the Title IX office, which may include a no-contact directive, restricting the students from communicating with one another, or a safety plan, which defines safe places that a student can go on campus. Students are entitled to these measures even if the school does not agree that they were harassed or assaulted.

Support Systems for Victims

MZ: What resources can schools provide to students who experience sexual harassment, such as counseling or peer support groups? JC: In addition to the supportive measures mentioned earlier, school counselors can help students work through trauma. But counselors are often overworked due to understaffing. Counselors in certain states may be required to report suspected sexual abuse, so students may not want to speak with them. Local sexual assault organizations can help victims find confidential resources outside of school.

MZ: How are bystanders or witnesses encouraged to intervene or report incidents? JC: There are many online resources and videos about bystander intervention. At SASH Club, we created a short video called “How can I intervene to prevent sexual harassment or assault?” which explains the 3 Ds: direct intervention, distract, and delegate.

School Culture and Inclusivity

MZ: What steps are taken to ensure an inclusive environment where all genders feel safe and respected? JC: Many schools have implemented gender equity clubs and created safe spaces for non-gender-conforming students, like GSAs--gender and sexuality alliances. The GLSEN website is a great place to learn more.

MZ: Are there clubs or student organizations focused on gender equality or advocacy against harassment? JC: GSAs, girls’ empowerment clubs like Girls Learn International, youth-focused projects like SASH Club, and SSAIS for adult allies are pushing to create safe spaces for discussions around belonging and identity.

Proactive Prevention Strategies

MZ: What proactive measures do schools take to prevent incidents of sexual harassment, beyond responding to reports? JC: Sex education is a touchy subject and doesn’t address prevention of sexual harassment and assault. Sex ed is often lackluster and inadequate for students. Many students turn to pornographic material to fill the gaps in sexual education, failing to realize that porn is not sex ed.

Parent and Guardian Involvement

MZ: How do schools involve parents and guardians in creating a safe environment for students? JC: This varies widely. At the very least, parents and adult allies are encouraged to have conversations with their students about sexual harassment, assault, and safety.

Accountability and Continuous Improvement

MZ: How does the school assess the effectiveness of its policies and programs to combat sex discrimination and harassment? JC: Schools should conduct climate surveys. From my eye view, the education students receive on sexual violence, their rights, and the policies in place are minimal at best.

by Sofia Bocchino

When the inauguration took place on January 20th, 2025, President Donald Trump promised to create several executive orders which directly threaten the futures of immigrants, people of color in the workforce, and transgender residents of the United States of America. As of January 9th, Donald Trump has written 59 executive orders; however, many of these orders have not been implemented yet. While a president can create as many executive orders as they desire, they do not have the power to violate federal law or overpower another branch of government. In order to understand the purpose, threats posed, and current course of action regarding Trump’s orders, it is crucial to understand the history and process of carrying out an executive order. The first unofficial executive orders to be carried out were implemented by George Washington, the first president of the United States. Washington’s first executive order was communicated by letter on June 8th, 1789. This order requested that the heads of the federal departments provide a general outline of U.S. affairs. When Washington was inaugurated in 1789, the newly implemented “Federal government” replaced the “perpetual union” which operated under the articles of confederation. The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union was an agreement made by the original 13 states (formerly known as colonies) which established the nation as a political entity. This first frame of government was replaced by the Constitution after undergoing ratification by New Hampshire in 1788. The federal government and the Constitution outline the U.S. federal system today, establishing the fundamentals of government for the good of the people. 

The right to create executive orders was first established in the Constitution. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), article II of the Constitution vests the president with executive power over the government, making them obligated to ensure that all laws are “faithfully executed,” but not changed. Statutes of limitations are put in place so the president, or any other government officials cannot sidestep them. The president’s executive orders may dictate how a federal agency should implement a statute, but it may not overrule federal laws already enacted by legislative or judicial branches. For example, the president may tell the Department of Homeland Security to implement a certain rule or prioritize a new policy, but nothing that breaks a federal law or statute. Contrary to the desired orders President Trump has claimed he will enact, these checks and balances still apply in his presidency, and he does not have the power to change that. President Trump can order the federal government to take any action he sees as fit as long as it is constitutional and does not break federal law. While executive orders are often regarded as fast-acting and a sole product of the executive branch, they must follow some form of review by a federal agency before taking effect. Usually, an executive order requires a federal agency to write a report, undergo an investigation, or implement a new regulation. This can take several months, unless the order provides a certain deadline. There are three ways an executive order can be vetoed, including congress enacting a law to reverse what the president has ordered (assuming it is in their constitutional authority to legislate), or the order can be taken to court on grounds that it is unconstitutional and violates a federal law or statute. 

In the past month, 59 executive orders have been created, but not all have been passed. The White House published an executive order on February 5th signed by President Trump that aims to “keep men out of women’s sports,” essentially banning transgender athletes from participating in competitive sports who identify as a different gender than assigned at birth. This executive order will direct federal agencies to interpret transgender participation in competitive athletics as a violation of Title IX, prohibiting transgender women from participating in all female sports categories. If high schools and universities do not comply with this order, the Executive branch claims that they will cut the institution’s federal funding and potentially be threatened with legal action. Trump has signed several additional restrictive executive orders as well, further threatening the futures of immigrants, members of the LGBTQI+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex) community, and racially diverse groups. Some of these other orders include cutting federal funding to medical institutions which provide gender-affirming care for children and young adults, ending Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs in federal government which provide “Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities” as stated in the Executive Order signed by former President Joe Biden, and carrying out mass deportation for all immigrants who have not yet obtained citizenship. Many of these orders have already been put into action as seen with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids across the nation in schools, homes, and businesses; and hospitals ceasing to offer gender-affirming care out of fear of losing federal funding. There is still hope for preserving policies that Trump wants to change. Under explicit circumstances, overturning or blocking executive orders is possible if a violation of federal law, statute, or the constitution is determined. The most notable and controversial executive order that President Donald Trump wants to enact is revoking birthright citizenship. Over the course of the past month, two U.S. District Judges, John C. Coughenour in Seattle and Deborah Boardman in Maryland, have blocked Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship for children whose biological parents are not citizens. These judges are working to build a lawsuit against Trump’s executive order on grounds that it violates the 14th amendment. According to the Constitution, the 14th amendment states that citizenship is to be granted to all people born or naturalized in the U.S., guaranteeing citizens “equal protection of the laws.” As previously stated, if an executive order violates federal law, statute, or is determined to be unconstitutional, it can be blocked by a federal court and therefore will not be passed. These checks and balances prohibit President Trump from side-stepping the law or overpowering another branch. 

by Sofia Bocchino

As a young activist, I have learned that bringing my voice into the media is essential for broadcasting issues that I seek to spread awareness about. Whether it be through social media, brand advertisements, public broadcasting, or even blogs such as the one you are reading right now, media advocacy is essential for gaining wide-spread awareness on social injustice and combating it through a network of people across the globe. Ben & Jerry’s, a popular ice cream chain established in Burlington, Vermont, is known for their unique combination of producing sweet treats and funding charitable causes. From flavors like “Save Our Swirled” addressing climate change to “I Dough, I Dough” in honor of the legalization of same-sex marriage, raising millions of dollars for the Human Rights Campaign, Ben & Jerry’s has shown their devotion to supported charitable causes thanks to the helps of their customers. 

To me, Ben & Jerry’s seems like the ideal company to sponsor a cause with, as their previous accomplishments and alignment with pressing social justice issues show that they are an equitable company willing to help foster progressive action in our ever-changing world. If I were to work alongside Ben & Jerry, the charitable flavor I would create would be “Strawberry Solidarity Swirl.” By creating this flavor, I would aim to support women with and survivors of breast cancer, donating proceeds from the product purchases to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure, an organization dedicated to supporting patients with financial need and to funding research. This unique title is a combination of two factors which are extremely influential in my day-to-day life: social justice and strawberry ice cream. The pink color of the strawberry ice cream represents the symbol of hope that stands for breast cancer awareness. By purchasing “Strawberry Solidarity Swirl,” customers would show their support for women battling breast cancer, standing in solidarity against the illness and contributing to the advancement of research and treatment. Women’s healthcare became a social justice issue of interest for me this year, when I began research for a fundraiser my Girls Learn International (GLI) chapter organized for breast cancer awareness month. We raised hundreds of dollars for the cause and donated our proceeds to the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF), inspiring me to dive deeper into the findings of this organization and others like it, and the various ways they support patients and survivors. 

This topic is also important to me as an activist and feminist, as U.S. healthcare could potentially be threatened as a result of the upcoming presidential term and I believe that those involved in social justice must advocate for change in response to this. It is crucial that this life-saving healthcare still receives proper funding, easy access, and unconditional support in times of government uncertainty and adversity. According to the National Library of Medicine, financial toxicity, the negative impact finance has on patients, has heavily affected those with breast cancer in the past several years. In low and middle-income regions, the rate of financial toxicity in patients with breast cancer was reportedly 78.8%, and in high-income regions it was 35.3%. The severity of these statistics demonstrates the need for high quality healthcare for all patients to combat the complications and financial burden that come with having breast cancer or having a loved one with breast cancer. 

interview by Madison Zhan

Heather Sham, Senior Director of Graphics Platform Engineering at AMD and 2023 Recipient of Women Worth Watching® Award

It is always inspiring to see women in leadership positions, particularly in fields such as engineering where only 13.7% of workers are women. Heather Sham, 2023 recipient of the Women Worth Watching® Award shares her story about what it takes to move quickly up the professional ladder in a male-dominated career!

When you began your career many years ago, did you ever imagine that you would have a leadership role in this profession/organization?

Early on, I never had specific intentions of taking on a leadership role. My strengths in communication, being able to connect the dots, and seeing the big picture were a good fit for the initial leadership roles I had. Growth continued from there.

Describe your leadership style and how you “lead” others. Is it different from your male counterparts?

Having a strong network and building trust with your team and peers is key—no one can be successful alone. These strong relationships enable me to get things done and challenge the team to keep raising the bar. I leverage my deep knowledge and experience to build trust with the team and provide guidance and judgment in tough situations. I also have a direct and honest communication style. I provide clarity and focus for the team. This is no different than my male counterparts.

How do you balance career, personal life and passions? Is there such a thing as balance?

I am a strong believer in work-life balance. I rarely work in the evenings or weekends. This is an exception in my company and in the industry. It has forced me to focus on what is important and therefore allows me to be more efficient and effective at work. On the rare occasions when I do work or have a meeting in the evening, I can’t shut my mind down after work and then I am not as well rested and energized the next day.

What advice would you give to the next generation of female leaders?

My guiding principles in my career and life:

Have passion for what you do. At work, this means solving challenges, providing direction, and driving change to improve and simplify while positively impacting people, products, and processes. At home, this is spending time with family and prioritizing experiences and vacations to make memories. You can have a successful career without sacrificing time with family and for yourself.

Be authentic. This means focusing on your strengths and not compromising who you are for what others want you to be. My style is direct and efficient communication, challenging the status quo, focusing on actions, and not stressing about things I can’t change. I am stubbornly independent. 

Help each other. We are stronger together, whether collaborating on a project or learning from each other. Since I have benefited from many role models, I look for opportunities to share my experiences with others.

Interview by Madison Zhan

Level 4 is when people start looking at you with awe and almost a sense of Godliness … this is the highest and toughest ski-level instruction certification in Canada where only 0.01% are females. It requires intense training, often over several years, and it has a very low pass rate! 

Meet Anik Waterman, a Level 4 Ski Instructor from Mont Tremblant in Quebec, Canada. Her journey to achieve this remarkable feat is a testament to her unwavering dedication, unmatched skill, and sheer determination. Anik not only defied the odds as one of the rare female Level 4 instructors but also shattered gender barriers, inspiring skiers, both male and female, to reach for their own personal summits. Her expertise on the slopes is matched only by her passion for teaching and sharing the joy of skiing with others. 

What is the secret to your success?

Never stop learning! I’m always trying to get better at everything I do. You never stop learning.

Do you teach other ski instructors how to instruct? 

Yes, I train other ski instructors on how to teach and how to become better instructors.

What is the greatest barrier for women to achieve this level of ski instruction? 

Having children. It is a lot to juggle!

What inspired you to become a ski instructor?

My dad was a ski coach for thirteen years and my mom was a ski patroller, so we are just a big ski family. I became a ski instructor as a way to get a free ski pass, continue skiing, and get better!

Do you have any advice for women who want to become top-level ski instructors or succeed in other male-dominated fields?