News: Trump Destroys D.E.I. Hiring

DEI workplace illustrations by A.I.

Trump Destroys D.E.I. Hiring

.

In a sweeping move that has sent ripples through the federal workforce and beyond, President Donald Trump has issued executive orders dismantling Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs within the federal government. These actions, which include placing DEI staff on paid leave and deactivating related web pages, mark a significant departure from previous efforts to promote inclusivity in public institutions. 

The administration’s stance is that DEI initiatives constitute “illegal and immoral discrimination programs” and divert from merit-based hiring practices. By revoking Executive Order 11246, originally signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965 to prohibit employment discrimination by federal contractors, the current administration aims to eliminate what it perceives as preferential treatment based on race, sex, or religion. 

Critics argue that dismantling DEI programs threatens decades of progress in addressing systemic inequalities. Civil rights advocates express concern that these measures will reduce workplace diversity and hinder efforts to combat discrimination. The rollback of DEI initiatives is seen by some as a step backward in promoting equal employment opportunities for historically marginalized groups. 

DEI hire_drag_queen-illustration
DEI

The implications of these executive orders extend beyond the federal workforce, potentially influencing the broader American economy and job opportunities for people of color and other non-white ethnic groups. Federal contractors, who were previously mandated to implement affirmative action programs under Executive Order 11246, may now feel less compelled to prioritize diversity in their hiring practices. This shift could lead to decreased representation of minority groups in various industries, as companies may no longer be incentivized to actively promote inclusive hiring. 

Moreover, the administration’s directive to encourage the private sector to end DEI initiatives could have a chilling effect on corporate diversity efforts nationwide. Businesses that once invested in DEI programs to foster inclusive workplaces might scale back or eliminate these initiatives, fearing potential scrutiny or repercussions. Such a trend could exacerbate existing disparities in employment and advancement opportunities for underrepresented groups. 

The trickle-down effect of these policies may also impact educational institutions and nonprofit organizations. With the federal government signaling a departure from DEI commitments, universities and nonprofits that rely on federal funding might reconsider their diversity programs to align with the new directives. This could result in reduced support systems for students and communities of color, further entrenching systemic inequities. 

In summary, the administration’s recent executive orders to eliminate DEI programs represent a significant policy shift with far-reaching consequences. While proponents argue that these measures restore merit-based practices, critics contend that they undermine efforts to promote diversity and inclusion, potentially reversing progress made in creating equitable opportunities for all Americans.

DEI hire_drag_queen-illustration
DEI

Transgender Identity: A Journey of Authenticity and Courage

Portrait of transgender male by Tony Ward copyright 2024
Danae. Photo: Tony Ward, Copyright 2024

Understanding Transgender Identity

.

A Journey of Authenticity and Courage

.

In a world rich with diversity, understanding the nuances of identity is crucial. Among the many facets of human identity is the experience of being transgender—a deeply personal journey of aligning one’s internal sense of self with their external reality. But what does it truly mean to be transgender?

A transgender person is someone whose gender identity—their deeply felt sense of being male, female, or something beyond—differs from the sex assigned to them at birth. This distinction between biological sex (often categorized as male or female based on physical attributes) and gender identity (a psychological and social construct) is central to understanding the transgender experience.

For many, the journey begins with an internal realization. A transgender person may feel that their assigned sex doesn’t align with how they see themselves. This disconnect, known as gender dysphoria, can cause emotional distress, but it is not universal. Some transgender individuals embrace their identity without experiencing dysphoria, focusing instead on self-expression and authenticity.

Being transgender is not defined by a specific path or set of actions. While some may undergo medical interventions such as hormone therapy or gender-affirming surgeries, others choose not to or cannot due to personal, financial, or health reasons. Transitioning can also be social, involving changes in name, pronouns, clothing, or behavior. Each journey is unique, and there’s no “right” way to be transgender.

Transgender individuals exist in every culture and have throughout history. Despite this, many face misunderstanding, discrimination, and stigma. Education and awareness are vital in fostering acceptance and creating environments where transgender people can live authentically. Respecting a transgender person’s chosen name and pronouns is a simple yet profound way to show support and affirmation.

It’s also important to recognize the incredible resilience of transgender individuals. Many navigate societal expectations, personal challenges, and systemic barriers with courage and grace. Their stories enrich our understanding of humanity and remind us of the strength it takes to live one’s truth.

At its core, being transgender is about authenticity. It’s the pursuit of aligning one’s life with their true self, despite the obstacles. By embracing transgender individuals with empathy and respect, we move closer to a world that celebrates the full spectrum of human identity.

.

Portrait of transgender male by Tony Ward photographer copyright 2024
Danae. Photo: Tony Ward, Copyright 2024

Roberts Supreme Court: The Future of Sexual Freedoms

A photo illustration for an article on sexual freedoms for Tony Ward Erotica
Sexual Freedoms. Photo: Tony Ward, Copyright 2024.

The Future of Sexual Freedoms Under the Roberts Supreme Court

.

Post-Dobbs and Roe v. Wade

.

A Shift in Legal Precedent

The decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which had guaranteed a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion for nearly five decades, marks a significant shift in the Court’s approach to sexual freedoms. By returning the power to regulate abortion to the states, the Court has opened the door to a patchwork of laws that vary widely across the country. Some states have swiftly moved to ban or severely restrict abortion, while others have enacted protections, creating a deeply divided nation. This fragmentation not only affects reproductive rights but also signals a broader trend toward states having greater autonomy over sexual freedoms.

Potential Impacts Beyond Abortion Rights

The Dobbs decision has also raised concerns about the potential rollback of other rights related to sexual freedom. Justice Clarence Thomas, in his concurring opinion, suggested that the Court should reconsider precedents related to contraception and same-sex marriage. Although Chief Justice John Roberts has not explicitly supported such a move, the mere suggestion has caused anxiety among those who fear the erosion of established rights. This signals that other aspects of sexual freedom, previously thought to be secure, could be vulnerable to future challenges.

The Role of the Roberts Court

Under Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court has demonstrated a cautious but deliberate approach to shifting the legal landscape on social issues. While Roberts himself is often seen as a moderate, his leadership has facilitated a more conservative tilt, especially with the recent additions to the Court. This shift suggests that the Court may continue to uphold or even expand state powers in regulating sexual freedoms, potentially revisiting and reinterpreting precedents that impact contraception, LGBTQ+ rights, and privacy issues.

A Future of Uncertainty

As the Court continues to shape the legal framework of sexual freedoms in the post-Dobbs era, Americans are left facing an uncertain future. The direction the Roberts Court takes in upcoming cases will likely determine whether sexual freedoms are further restricted or if a balance can be struck between state regulation and individual rights. What remains clear is that the era of certainty provided by Roe v. Wade has ended, and a new chapter of legal battles and state-by-state variability has begun.

Bob Shell: A Vast Wasteland

Beautiful German woman lying on bed nude with television on
Simone With TV on at Hotel Village, Hamburg Germany. Photo: Tony Ward, Copyright 2024

Text by Bob Shell, Copyright 2024

.

A Vast Wasteland

.

I grew up in television. My father, Jim Shell, was the news anchor for WSLS TV Channel 10, the NBC affiliate in Roanoke, Virginia, and I used to hang around the TV station as an obnoxious kid.. So it was natural for me to go to work in television after college. In 1971 I worked for WRFT TV Channel 27, in Roanoke, the ABC affiliate. My boss there was Adrian Cronauer, the man Robin Williams portrayed in the film ‘Good Morning Vietnam.’ It was a very small TV station, so everyone did everything. I did newscasts, weather reports, hosted late night horror movies, produced, directed, ran the soundboard, was staff artist and photographer, etc. It was a great learning experience.

Back in those days the man who headed the Federal Communications Commission, the FCC, was a fellow with the amazing name of Newton Minnow. I always thought he must have been teased in school for being called Newt Minnow, named for two little aquatic critters.

Anyway, after assuming chairmanship of the FCC, Mr. Minnow watched a lot of TV and famously called TV ‘a vast wasteland.’ In those pre-cable days, the FCC had near absolute control over TV. For example, there was an FCC rule against portraying superstition as factual. This resulted in the cancellation of ‘The Sixth Sense,’ a program I liked, because it portrayed psychic phenomena as true. It always bugged me that this rule wasn’t enforced against TV preachers. The worst I ever saw was Billy James Hargass who performed miracle healings on his program. Don Imus did a wonderful parody with his Billy Sol Hargass character.

When I watch TV today on cable, I ask myself ‘Where is Newt Minnow now that we need him?” TV today has sunk to depths he could never have imagined. But the FCC, by law, has jurisdiction only over broadcast TV and radio, it lacks any authority to regulate cable TV or cable radio. The results are obvious.

One thing the FCC did was regulate the amount of time commercials could take up in programs. When I worked in TV, we never ran more than two commercials in a single commercial break, only two breaks per half hour, and both commercials were thirty seconds in length. Today there are so many commercials in a break that I lose count! This, in my opinion, dilutes the value of them all. And it disrupts the continuity of the program. This is why old TV programs must be reedited to make room for all of the additional commercials, often disrupting the story.

When TV was broadcast-only we watched TV for free. The programming was paid for by the advertisers. Why today do we pay for cable TV and still suffer through commercials? It’s like double-taxation!
I’m an admitted news junkie. I watch NewsNation a lot to stay informed. But I’ve become burned out on repetition of the same commercials ad nauseam.
For example, if I see Jonathan Lawson hyping Colonial Penn life insurance again I may start pulling out my hair. I’ve noted that he says your rates will never increase, but he does not say that your coverage will never decrease!

Or the jewelry company called Pandora. Anyone who knows a bit of Greek mythology knows that Pandora was the first human woman. In Greek, Pandora means ‘All Gifts.’ After Zeus created her, he gave her a beautiful box, but strictly ordered her not to open it. Pandora could not restrain her curiosity and opened the box, releasing all evils upon mankind. Name your company after the person who unleashed all evil? What were they thinking?
I could go on about the stupidity of commercials, but I’ll spare my readers that vitriol. My point is that there are too many commercials, and too many of them are just plain stupid. Advertisers must believe the famous quote variously attributed to P. T. Barnum and F. W. Woolworth; ‘No one ever went bankrupt by underestimating the good taste of the American public.’

Nef Nels: Politicians in My Panties

Black woman wearing white lingerie partially nude
Photo: Tony Ward, Copyright 2023

Text by Nef Nels, Copyright 2023

.

Politicians in My Panties

.

How are babies made mommy? That’s one of the first major questions that’s a child asks their parents after discovering that there is a world outside of toys and TV. A lot of mommy’s get this question when their belliy’s grow big with a baby.

But what happens if that baby is not alive or you know will soon pass away after birth? What do you tell your curious child? How do you break the news to them?

My mother had to carry a deceased baby to term because of the laws back in the seventies. She never got over it. She told me about the day he passed away. She could tell that something was wrong because he quivered and jerked all day. She said he then stopped moving and never moved again.  She went to the hospital and was told she had to carry him for over two months knowing he was not alive. She talked about the silence in the delivery room and the way he looked after being pulled out via Cesarean section.

Why do some men feel the need to torture women this much. Do they really hate us that badly?

This can’t be just about pro life. Maybe Dave Chapelle was right in his comedy special when he told the women of #metoo that the men were going to seek revenge- because they have.

I know it’s not in all states but for the states that do have these laws where politicians decide what’s best for mother and baby and not their doctors, it’s frightening. A pregnant woman is really not free any longer. She is a prisoner to the whim of an agenda that isn’t helping anyone. Especially a little boy or girl who runs to mommy’s belly and asks “mommy when is my baby brother or sister coming? And the mother must answer – I’m sorry there will not be a baby – mommy’s belly must stay big  because the men who make the laws say that it has to.