By Lisa Paliotti

Abuse against nature exists everywhere in today’s society. Examples include the excessive use and depletion of natural resources, pollution of clean air, land and water, consumer rejection of the biodegradable Sun Chips bag because it was “too loud”, etc. What’s important to realize is that nature can live without humans and the abuse they provide, but humans cannot live without the domination of nature. Humans are nature’s messy and abusive room-mates.

Ecology studies the relationships between living organisms including human groups and their physical and social environments. Feminism is theory and methodology toward the political, economic and social equality of women and men. The term “eco-feminism” studies the relationship between ecology and feminism.

Activists in environmental and feminist movements began to realize in the late 1980s and 1990s that their goals for creating change are not quite so different. The oppression of women and the domination of nature in eco-feminists theories are connected and reinforcing.  Eco-feminist Ynestra King said, “Life on earth is an interconnected web, not a hierarchy. There is no natural hierarchy; human hierarchy is projected onto nature and then used to justify social domination.”

Read more: Eco-feminism and Violence Against Women

By Chris Wilhite

First, let us attempt to have a common definition of oppression. The most widely used definitions of oppression among groups dedicated to ending it are:

1. power + prejudice, that is, the power to enforce prejudice and stereotypes, and
2. a system of advantage based on some attribute (race, gender, class or economic status, religion, sexual orientation or identity, etc.).

Before the so-called Tea Party was coopted by big business, it consisted of protesters from across the political spectrum. Very quickly, however, the Tea Party experienced a Cultural Revolution that ratted out all the progressive types to create an exclusive, more puritanical right-wing fringe funded by some of the biggest companies on Wall Street. But I think it is fair enough to say that initially, the people who came together under the Tea Party banner were concerned about the oppression of the many by the few, in terms of economic oppression.

Read more: Economic Oppression, Sexism, and Racism

By Sara Molinaro

In one of my classes in college, we had a rule: if you talked about Law & Order, you had to leave. (The implication was that the show was so fictionalized, so far from reality, that nothing could stand to benefit from discussing it.) That being said, there’s no doubting the success of the Law & Order franchise. The show, which has aired almost 500 episodes and is entering its 20^th season, is a staple of nighttime TV drama, and has even coined a signature sound.

The popularity of the show is one of the reasons why it’s so problematic when the show depicts crimes inaccurately, and that problem is compounded when the crime is already one in which stereotypes abound.

Such is the case with John Stamos’ most recent stint on Law & Order: SVU. Now, my inner 3-year-old has a hard time taking an issue with anything that Uncle Jesse does (he’s so dreamy) but his guest stint on the crime show was just… inaccurate.

Continuing its “ripped from the headlines” style, Law & Order took the subject of Stamos’ episode from the media’s newfound interest in reproductive abuse. New studies have been released over the past few months, confirming what domestic violence advocates have known forever: one method domestic violence perpetrators use to control their victims is reproductive abuse. The phrase “reproductive abuse” refers to acts ranging from birth control sabotage to forced unprotected sex, with the intent of forcing the victim to become pregnant against her will. (This runs counter to the popular sexist notion that lots of women get pregnant “accidentally-on-purpose” in order to control their male partners.)

Read more: John Stamos Plays a Reproductive Abuser

By Lisa Paliotti 

Charity in football has come a long way since the days of “passing the hat”. The Green Bay Packers are linking up with Verizon Wireless for a second year in a row to combat the issue of domestic violence nationally in a campaign titled, “Protection is the Name of the Game."

In 2010, The Green Bay Packers started to collect old cell phones no longer in use at all of their home games. For each phone they received, Verizon Wireless made ten dollar cash donation to benefit domestic violence organizations in Wisconsin and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. The Packers began their contribution to the Hope Line cell phone drive, receiving a total of 767 cell phones and $7,670 divided amongst the seven existing domestic violence organizations in the local area.

Verizon started the Hope Line in 2001 because of the realization that an old phone sitting in a drawer could be the life saving protection for a victim from their batterer. As fads in new phone technology come and go, your prehistoric flip phone the size of a large sub at De Angelo’s is cooler than you think. That old phone can provide the vital connection between domestic violence victims and emergency support services. That old phone will help that survivor build their life again looking for jobs and housing where they will be safe. Since its commencement the Hope Line has collected over 8 million phones and dispensed over $10 million in grants to domestic violence agencies.

Read more: NFL Team Takes a Stand Against Domestic Violence