Since then, while covering the topic of human trafficking, I have heard Lloyd talk at numerous events and panels. I have called her up for quotes and insights, like the time football star Lawrence Taylor was arrested. I had needed to get a lucid response on why the media was portraying an under-age trafficked girl as a “hooker.”

Lloyd always speaks the truth to power. It may be to a New York City police commissioner, or an affluent Manhattan audience learning for the first time that 13-year-old African-American girls in Bedford–Stuyvesant, Brooklyn are being bought and sold. Lloyd frequently notes that they are part of an estimated 200,000-300,000 adolescents who are at risk annually for commercial sexual exploitation in the United States.

Consequently, it was no surprise to me that the memoir Lloyd had penned, Girls Like Us: Fighting for a World Where Girls Are Not for Sale, an Activist Finds Her Calling and Heals Herself, would be a tough, gritty and brutally honest account. Lloyd traces how a difficult childhood led to a hair-raising journey that encompassed risk, recruitment, violent abuse, breaking free from sexual exploitation—and ultimately healing. She now is a top activist in the anti-trafficking movement.

Finding her purpose in working with girls “in the life,” Lloyd connects to those in crisis based on shared experiences, understanding without judgment, and respect. Founding Girls Educational and Mentoring Services (GEMS) in 1998, Lloyd went back to school to attain her GED, going on to receive a Bachelors degree in Psychology from Marymount Manhattan College and a Masters in Applied Urban Anthropology from the City College of New York. She has racked up numerous awards for her efforts, all while “owning her experience.”

Girls Like Us presents a dual story. One is Lloyd’s personal narrative; the other is a primer on what trafficked American girls are up against. Lloyd outlines the elements that make girls vulnerable, examines how they are sexually exploited, and discusses the role of pimps, johns, and cops in the equation. The inherent difficulties of overcoming the trauma of sexual servitude often mimic the symptoms of Stockholm syndrome and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Lloyd breaks down one fallacy after another, many unfortunately believed by social workers, law enforcement officials, and those making decision calls in the judicial system. If misconceptions could start to be addressed, perhaps a real awareness toward new solutions could be innovated.

There is so much that needs to change, and Lloyd points out the problems with crystal clarity. One of her frequent talking points is the statistic that the estimated median age of entry into the commercial sex industry occurs between the ages of 12 and 14. Defining the difference between an “exploited child and a prostitute” is a full time endeavor. She explains that “leaving the life takes practice,” and that girls need to have the unfailing support of a person who will not “give up on them.” Most important to note are the socioeconomic causes, that for some baffling reason appear more comprehensible when they occur in foreign countries, but which are insufficiently grasped on our own national turf.

Lloyd posits that too often the wrong questions are asked. Instead of taking a facile approach to a girl’s situation with the query, “Why doesn’t she just leave?”—Lloyd suggests an examination of the impact of lack of income, homelessness, and neglect, along with “race and class factors.” There are over 500,000 children in New York City living in poverty.

For police who don’t understand that captivity isn’t an issue of being physically tied and bound, it can be frustrating to translate the depths of a “trauma bond” in an existence predicated on terror. Leaving the life and making the transition is difficult. As Lloyd says, “Healing is a messy, complicated process that’s rarely linear.” It doesn’t help that society—even those tasked with supporting victims—often relay the message that the girl’s “exploitation was their choice,” leaving them with a burden of shame and a “policy that blames the victim.”

One of the major challenges is the need to reframe not only attitudes, but also language. The United Nations and UNICEF have adopted the term commercially sexually exploited child/youth to reference those who are underage.  New terminology will help grow novel thinking. Once assimilated into the collective mindset, a change can start to be reflected in the media and popular culture. As Lloyd emphasizes, most of America didn’t have trouble understanding the trauma of Elizabeth Smart. But when you shift from her story to a 14-year-old girl of color in the Bronx, the reaction is totally different.

Girls Like Us puts it all out there—no holds barred. In addition to the contribution that Lloyd has made with a book filled with visceral punch and detailed veracity, she has left the public with nowhere to hide.

There can no longer be the question, “Who knew?”

They crisscross the demographics of age and style and include Miley Cyrus, Joan Baez, Jackson Browne, Elvis Costello, Lenny Kravitz, Sting, Patti Smith and Pete Seeger. The performers, as well as those on the production and tech side, worked pro-bono. Listening to all of the tracks, it is clear that each singer has brought their unique personality and stamp to the material. A prime example is Ziggy Marley’s interpretation of “Blowin’ in the Wind.”

It’s not the first time that Amnesty International has tapped into the music community to raise funds and bring awareness to human rights issues. For this initiative, they have created action links to specific individuals and their plights. One of the focal points of the campaign is Liu Xiaobo, scholar, human rights fighter, and Nobel Peace Prize laureate. Xiaobo has been imprisoned in China since 2009, for his critiques of the Chinese political system and for underscoring governmental corruption in his writing.

Helen Garrett, Director of Special Projects for Amnesty International USA (who was the key producer on the 2007 benefit album Instant Karma: The Amnesty International Campaign to Save Darfur) proposed in 2010 that Amnesty mark its half-century anniversary with a follow-up album. cultureID was able to interview her about the project via e-mail.

In 1961, British lawyer Peter Benenson published an article in The Observer titled, “The Forgotten Prisoners,” in response to the plight of two Portuguese students who had been imprisoned for toasting freedom. The action became the seeds of Amnesty International. 1962 was the year of Bob Dylan’s first album. He performed at the March on Washington the following year. Can you comment on the parallel paths and threads of commonality between the work of Dylan and Amnesty?

Certainly, for human rights activists, Dylan’s early music holds special meaning—he was the protest voice of the 1960s with songs like “Blowin’ In the Wind,” “I Shall be Released,” and “Chimes of Freedom.” During that time, there was a sense that if ordinary people joined together, they could have enormous impact to change the world.  And that is how Amnesty was born—one man’s belief that individuals together can make a difference. In fact, there is a direct line between Amnesty and Dylan through “I Shall be Released,” as the song became the movement’s “unofficial anthem” on the finale of each concert on Amnesty International’s 1986 Conspiracy of Hope U.S.A. concert tour. Dylan was among the performers.

Of course, Dylan never joined any specific organizations, but his uncanny ability to identify and articulate the temper of the 1960s–and the demands people were making for freedom, justice and dignity—led him to write powerful songs about the human impulses that propel causes like the human rights movement. Dylan’s incomparable artistry–his iconic status–is measured against the hope and achievements that I believe Amnesty International as an organization brings to humanity.

Historian Sean Wilentz, who wrote the album liner notes, sums up our thinking beautifully.  He observes that Amnesty for a half century has pressed to secure basic rights for the persecuted and imprisoned across the globe, while during the same time frame, Dylan’s art has explored and expressed the anguish and hope of the modern human condition.  “Mistrusting worldly authority,” Wilentz writes, “Dylan gives sympathetic voice to the countless confused, accused, misused” people he sings about in “Chimes of Freedom.”

Beyond raising funds from the sales of the CDs and individual songs, a primary goal stated by Amnesty is to bring visibility to the issue of free speech, censorship, and the imprisonment of dissidents. Do you expect that Amnesty will be reaching a new demographic about its goals and mission?

We’ve been engaged with the music community for a very long time– musicians literally helped us to build the human rights movement and increase awareness about the terrible threats that people around the world face as they try to live lives of dignity and attain freedom.

In 1986, as only one example, we launched a two-week U.S. concert tour to mark our 25^th anniversary, with stars like U2, Sting, Joan Baez and others.  Through this tour, Amnesty’s membership doubled. The albums are a small, but of course important, part of how we engage with musicians.  Bono invited Amnesty to be a part of the U2 360 concert tour and he promoted our work from the stage. We were in the stadiums signing up new supporters and asking them to take action (200,000 did).  Hans Zimmer wrote an anthem for Amnesty’s 50^th anniversary. After Green Day appeared on American Idol back in 2007 for Instant Karma (singing Lennon’s “Working Class Hero”) our web traffic spiked hugely, increasing our audience for human rights activism—as well as raising awareness about the atrocities in Darfur and supporting our work there.

Of course we want people to buy the album to support our life-saving advocacy. But we are getting so much more out of this than just album sales, such as the reach of the musicians. They are promoting our work through their fan bases, their Facebook pages, and their Tweets. They direct people to the Amnesty website or Facebook page, which for many becomes a journey of discovery and engagement with us. Miley Cyrus and Kesha both “liked” our Amnesty Facebook page on December 10, Human Rights Day, when we streamed the full Chimes of Freedom album, and more than 100,000 people went to the page. We’ve seen a spike in our web and social media activity since.

The recording industry is very different today, as is the way people buy and listen to music. But this is a plus for us. The digital music world lets us engage on a new level through social media.  We are promoting six cases of individuals whose rights are being denied through this album, to keep people engaged on the human rights front through social media—spurred by our music projects.

Writers, artists, musicians, and filmmakers are frequent targets of governmental crackdowns. Do you think that this is because of their power to capture the imagination of people through visceral mediums?

When oppressive regimes clamp down on their citizens, freedom of expression—free speech—is always the first thing to go. Dictators have a lot to fear from individuals speaking up—through their writings, through art and film and music.  Authoritarian leaders live in fear of dissent spreading —because if people can keep talking about new ideas, they can start to act on them.  And nothing captures the human need to be free as powerfully as music and art and literature. Isn’t that what art and music are at their core—expressing who we are, our individuality, our freedom? Wherever you find a repressive regime, you’ll find people writing dissent or satire or drawing cartoons or singing about freedom. As human rights activists, free speech is our main means of fighting oppression. Our power to change what governments and others do to repress rights comes from the voices of people speaking up for human rights—and art and music and film capture the imagination in, yes, the most visceral ways.

Can you address Amnesty International’s commitment to recognizing the arts as a powerful vehicle to bring recognition to social and political issues?

Amnesty International is not in the music business, of course. We’re in the business of saving lives by standing up for human rights. And in this fight for justice and freedom and dignity, musicians have been our natural allies for decades.  We’ve also worked with filmmakers, cartoonists, actors and other artists as a powerful way to trumpet the message of human rights. The connection to musicians is one we pioneered—in concerts, albums and by working directly with musicians on issues.  For example, musicians like Big Boi and John Legend were tweeting about the Troy Davis case last September, which helped us enormously as we worked to try to stop his execution – an effort that failed but that has galvanized the movement to abolish the death penalty. Our alliance with musicians has existed for decades. Yoko Ono promotes our actions on her website; Sting spoke out for the mothers who lost loved ones in Argentina; State Radio, a young band, was so passionate about the Troy Davis case that they wrote a song about him. Decades ago, Joan Baez took a full year off to build Amnesty’s membership on the West Coast.

Our freedom to express ourselves–which musicians naturally feel in their bones—goes hand in hand with activism. Bono has said that when he first saw the show we pioneered, Secret Policeman’s Ball, “It became a part of me. It sowed a seed…”

Musicians want to support Amnesty–they’ve been behind us almost from the start. They care about human rights, and many are involved on a very deep level.  Pete Townshend was the first rock musician we worked with—back in the 70s, and he is still with us contributing to this album. So, an album like this is about engaging with the musicians who are our supporters–those who have been with us for decades, along with new ones.  They speak out for human rights, their fans listen, and the world listens.  Again, I look to Bono. He has been speaking out about the Burmese opposition leader Aung Sung Sui Kyi for decades—a situation he learned about from his work with Amnesty. And it’s not just rock musicians we work with. This year, we were so honored to have Hans Zimmer, the Oscar-winning Hollywood composer, write an anthem for Amnesty’s 50^th anniversary. How inspiring is that!

Album Cover Image by Mick Haggerty based on an original photograph by Jerry Schatzberg courtesy of Amnesty International

This article originally appeared on the website cultureID

It seems that despite whatever advancements the Environmental Protection Agency makes to keep the air clean and the public’s health safe, there will always be those calling for a “do-over.” It’s no longer the bully with the cowlick that always punched the boys or tripped the girls when the teacher wasn’t looking—it’s lobbyists, big coal and oil, those in industry with clout, and all the others who put profits over people.

It took decades to get the new Mercury and Air Toxics Standards released, and within weeks, the pushback has already begun. The Obama administration has presented landmark protection initiatives against airborne toxins, but the spin game has started in earnest.  There are those in Congress who have vowed to fight the new proposed regulations, despite polls that clearly show the American public supports the EPA and their efforts to protect the country’s air, water and land.

The facts are stated repeatedly. Mercury affects children’s brains. Toxic metals including nickel, arsenic, and chromium can cause cancer. New standards will eradicate 90 percent of power plant toxic emissions. As per the EPA, “Together, MATS and the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule are estimated to provide annual benefits of $150-$380 billion and prevent 18,000 – 46,000 premature deaths, 540,000 asthma attacks, 13,000 emergency room visits and 2 million missed work or school days each year.”

So what’s the problem? Well, first you have to wonder where politicians in opposition to the regulations are getting their information, and who their funders are. Many have received support from the Koch brothers, who are actively supplying big dollars to those agreeing with their premise that there is no such thing as climate change.

The Christian Science Monitor did a round up in December of where the field of Republican Presidential contenders stood on energy issues and the environment. It wasn’t encouraging. Jon Huntsman, who ended his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination on January 16, had been the most moderate, admitting to believing the science on global warming—while supporting “clean coal.” Rick Perry, who has been vocal about suspending “the job-killing Clean Air Act,” came to the conclusion on January 19 that there was “no viable path forward” for him. He has endorsed Newt Gingrich, who would “maximize oil, gas, and clean coal production.” Of the remaining Republican field, Rick Santorium resolves to “repeal Obama-era EPA regulations” and Ron Paul would just “eliminate the EPA.”

Mitt Romney has been in a class by himself, targeted for flip-flopping on a wide range of topics. His rapidly morphing reflections on climate change have garnered over 3500 views on YouTube.

The EPA has put out a Fact Sheet with bulleted points covering:

• Protecting public health
• Overdue reductions lead to vital health benefits
• Practical, cost-effect and protective standards
• Jobs for American workers
• Reliable, affordable energy

It will be the role of voters to demand that those running for office, at all levels, have a clearly defined stand on how the United States chooses to move into the 21^st Century—regarding our piece of the planet.

It’s time to stand up to the bullies.

This article originally appeared on the website Moms Clean Air Force.

Photo: T. Charles Erickson

A recent article in the New York Times pointed out that the United States’ war in Afghanistan remained “just a blip on the American news media’s radar in 2011.” The exact amount of coverage, in statistics from the Project for Excellence in Journalism, was given at 2 percent. Perhaps it is not surprising that the scope of the dealings that led to our involvement in that country are below-the-radar as well.

Blood and Gifts, a play by J.T. Rogers, creates a full overview of the issues and choices that were the precursors to our current situation. Commissioned by Lincoln Center Theater, and presented last year at the National Theatre, Blood and Gifts is currently being performed at the Mitzi E. Newhouse Theater through January 8.

Inserted into the Playbill, audience members received a printed supplement outlining the background for the action about to unfold. Furnishing a bare bones history, it explains that Afghanistan “occupies the only access from Central Asia to the West.” With the Cold War heating up, the nation became of geo-political interest.

Aspiring to modernize, Afghanistan asked the United States for aid. When America declined, they then reached out to the adjacent Soviet Union—who assisted them in the role of “ally” for thirty years. In 1979, when the U.S.S.R. perceived that Afghanistan was going to create a partnership with America, they invaded.

It is against the backdrop of an active battle between the Soviet forces and the people of Afghanistan that Blood and Gifts is set. A full range of characters is introduced, including operatives from the CIA, the British MI6, the KGB, and Pakistan’s intelligence agency ISI—as well as representatives from the national struggle. Each one has a very specific agenda.

The initial set is bathed in tones of blue, from the large square carpet to the six wooden benches placed along three sides. A lone suitcase sits on the floor. The actors enter, dressed in costumes ranging from suits to the turbans and mountain garb of the mujahideen.

The narrative is both riveting and instructive. The acting is top-notch. I reached out to J.T. Rogers to get additional insights into his process and endeavors in “theater that engages the public realm.”

This is not the first play where you have written about a political situation. Previously, in The Overwhelming, you tackled Rwanda. You have frequently noted that your father taught political science, and as a boy you lived in Malaysia and Indonesia. How has your background informed your choice of material?

I read an interview with Marsha Norman twenty plus years ago in which she made an observation that’s always stuck with me. She said that there are two kinds of American writers: Northern ones, who are both able–and go out of their way–to reinvent themselves; and Southern ones who know, no matter how far they travel, they will always be called home. I’ve always seen myself in the first camp, but now I’m not as sure. I was raised by divorced parents, spending much of each year both in central Missouri with my father and in the East Village. The constant in both homes was a passionate engagement in politics and a deep knowledge of and interest in other countries–both my parents having lived, together and apart, all over the world. As a playwright, I spent many years working through and then shedding different skins, trying to find my voice and the subject matters that truly gripped me. It’s only with hindsight that I understand that what my parents exposed me to, and what they raised me to value, would so inform my work. In essence, writing plays that delve into and are set against international and political concerns is simply me, as a writer, being called home.

As preparation for writing the play, you were able to dialogue with Steve Coll, author of Ghost Wars, and Jack Devine who served at the CIA and oversaw the sale of the Stinger missiles—featured prominently in the story line. How did you weave those conversations into the fabric of Blood and Gifts?

In a nutshell, the process works likes this for me: I read an enormous amount about the historical and political history that the story I’m going to tell is set against. Only after I’m stepped in the events do I start interviewing people who were personally involved. My aim is not to talk with folks about “talking points” or to be further educated but to get into the personal: What did you eat? What was the light like? The smells? Who really, really pissed you off? And on and on. Playwrighting is about detail and specificity; I take the specific details that folks are kind enough to share with me and I weave them into the characters I’ve created. The characters are mine, but these details help to ground them.

The first section of the drama establishes the characters and the backstory of the conflict in Afghanistan. There is a lot of material to digest. In tandem with this arc, you present the personal histories of the main players—which connect them as individuals and through parallel situations. How did you create a balance between the two elements?

I don’t break the story or characters up that way. I try to create dramatic situations and personae where people have to talk about politics—where it is as life-and-death important as, say, sex or violence is in many other stories. There is some “table setting” in the first act, so that there is an emotional wallop and a good yarn in act two, but I’ve tried to weave the personal and the political throughout.

When a large American flag descends, to serve as a backdrop for a hearing at

Photo: T. Charles Erickson

the United States Senate Building, the energy shifts. The murky cloak and dagger machinations of covert operations give way to spotlighting the issue of getting funding for the Afghan freedom fighters from “American taxpayers.” The previously established relationships, impacted by new forces, are operating in a new sphere. As the next piece in the puzzle, did you see this juncture as the place where the audience would readily identify?

Audiences tell you what your play is about. I’m always intrigued by how they react differently than I expected to some part of the story. In this production, when we arrive in DC at the top of Act Two there’s a palpable lowering of shoulders. There’s a collective sense of, “Ahhhhh, I know this world, I’m comfortable here.” But they do go back with me to Pakistan, and then Afghanistan, as the play hurdles on. The DC scenes have become an unforeseen “battery charge” for them, revving them up to go back to places and events that are deeply foreign to most of them.

The American agent, James Warnock, has a scene with his CIA boss where the focus is a moral exchange rather than one dealing with logistics. In this sequence, he asks, “Which action that I take will do less evil?” He is given the response, “In this work there is no perfect and no good.” By highlighting the personal as well as the national quandaries, you make the issues very relatable. What do you hope that theatergoers will take away from the play, and how does that reflect you initial goals in writing the play?

To say, There but by the grace of God go I. To ask themselves, “If I were in that position, screws tightening, the world seemingly hanging on my decision…what would I do, and what would my choice say about me?” I don’t have a point to make or theme to underline. I try to put the world on stage and let the audience decide what they think about who they meet and what transpires. Lots of questions raised but no answers given. Theater is good at the former, not so much at the latter.

This article originally appeared on cultureID

Photo Courtesy of Rick Reinhard/Children’s National Medical Center

As the last days of December waned, Lisa P. Jackson and the Environmental Protection Agency had a lot to celebrate. They made it through 2011.

They held their ground against a continued barrage of attacks by lawmakers—who did their best to denigrate the agency and render it toothless. They weathered a surprise walk back by the President on the smog initiative, which had to make them question if they had ample support to get their agenda accomplished. (It should be noted that the EPA is slated to receive about 1 percent of the 2012 Federal discretionary budget, a reduction of 12.6 percent.)

Working to back proposals for a clean environment were Representatives Jan Schakowsky, Donna Edwards, Henry Waxman and Senators Barbara Boxer and Thomas Carper. Advocates on the ground included Hollywood luminary Robert Redford, weighing in on the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, and “regular mothers”—who took their cue from Moms Clean Air Force—rolling up their sleeves and making sure their voices were heard.

On December 21, I live Tweeted the press conference held by Jackson, to announce the long awaited standards that would definitively limit emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants from the coal- and oil-burning powered plants situated around the country.

It hasn’t been easy. Despite testimony from a slew of health officials and organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Lung Association, pushback has continued based on the premise that regulations are an economy killer, or that the supply of electricity is at stake. During her presentation, which was held at the Children’s National Medical Center, Jackson once again drove home that the Mercury and Air Toxics standards (MATS) would avert “up to 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks” per year. In addition, it will prevent “130,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms and about 6,300 fewer cases of acute bronchitis among children” annually, while cutting down on the need for emergency room visits.

The primary goal of the twenty-year fight was to impact mercury emissions. Being flanked by physicians created terrific optics as Jackson spoke emphatically about mercury as a neurotoxin that negatively impacts the developing neurological systems of fetuses and young toddlers. She pointed out that one in six children are subject to neurological issues.

Professor Teresa Clemmer, who spoke to me at length prior to the release of the new rulings, had this response to the long awaited announcement:

“My reaction to the news is that this is a day to celebrate because EPA has finally taken a much needed action to regulate toxic emissions from the sources that emit the lion’s share of them. Considering the direct health benefits of this rule from controlling toxics, as well as the co-benefits from controlling particulates, this rule could prove to be one of the most important legacies of the Obama administration.”

Jackson, who is the mother of a son with asthma, pronounced the rulings as a “great victory for public health, especially the health of our children.”

Needless to say, in 2012, the fight will continue.

This article originally appeared on the website Moms Clean Air Force.

In her new memoir, Becoming Ginger Rogers: How Ballroom Dancing Made Me a Happier Woman, Better Partner, and Smarter CEO, Patrice Tanaka shares the story of how she committed to living in the present while putting joy in her life.

The shattering events of 9/11 are a backdrop to the beginning of Tanaka’s narration. The Twin Towers had been part of the view from her office window. She found herself repeatedly reflecting upon the losses experienced by those in the New York community—and the temporal nature of human beings. She was also dealing with her own struggles, both professional and personal.

Tanaka lays out the health challenges that she experienced from 1989 through 1990, and the illness of her adored husband, “Mr. Sweetheart,” who fought a cancerous brain tumor for fifteen years. During this period of time, she watched her spouse endure surgeries, radiation, and chemotherapy treatment. Tanaka became his caretaker, and despite the draining effects recognized a major message on the choice of how we experience life—“as a chore or as a joy.”

At the end of 2001, Tanaka was “exhausted and depressed.” A session in mid-2002 with an executive coach became a turning point for her when she was challenged with the question, “What is your grand mission in life, your true purpose on the planet?” Tanaka, still consumed by thoughts of those who had perished in the 9/11 attacks, kept focusing on the concept of living in the moment in a way that was meaningful. She told her coach that her specific meaning was to “choose joy each day.” When pressed to identify what brought her joy, Tanaka responded unequivocally, “Dancing.” She was given the assignment to book a dancing lesson for herself.

The reader follows Tanaka into the world of ballroom dancing, where her life was about to change in unexpected ways as she masters lessons on the dance floor that resonate far beyond new steps and winning competitions.

Photo Courtesy of Albert Parker

The text is punctuated with terpsichorean related quotes, “Intermezzo” pages that detail different dances from the Mambo to the Tango, and excerpted aphorisms from her revelations. Without a doubt, women will personally relate to the material. This includes the quest for perfectionism, apologizing too much, the need do put matters into context, and fear of failure or losing control. Through her dancing, Tanaka gradually morphs from a top PR executive who has carried the nickname “Ayatollah Tanaka,” to an in-the-moment “Samba Girl,” who can stop to celebrate her achievements and dance through her mistakes.

Eager to dig deeper into her insights, I spoke with Tanaka by telephone. She was open in discussing her personal transformation, telling me, “It’s about pursuing your joy. It will permeate your being. There is no downside!” Tanaka told me that she had written the book to help others and to communicate the key message, “Pursue your joy with a sense of urgency. Live out full and fiercely today with no regrets.”

I asked her to comment on the blocks that had hamstrung her and that remain problematic for so many women. On perfectionism she said, “It’s a fear based approach to life. We want to be perfect because we worry that if we make one mistake, people are going to stop loving us.” She qualified that path as a way of “disenfranchising others.” She explained, “Just because I make a mistake, doesn’t mean I’m a failure. Failures are stepping stones to success.” She specifically underscored how they could be applied to moving forward.

Regarding always putting other people’s needs first, Tanaka pronounced it a “female thing,” noting, “We want to make sure others are taken care of. We’re trying to be there 200 percent, and we put ourselves last.” In her business practice, Tanaka referred to the habit of giving more than 100 percent as “over-servicing.”

Underscoring the choice to choose between focusing on negativity or on blessings, Tanaka believes getting in touch with the gratitude can stop “the slide into the abyss.” One of the tips that she shared when we spoke was about creating a “joy calendar,” where you actively schedule two to three things per month to look forward to. In addition, every night she makes a mental note of the positive episodes of her day. She is a firm believer that “whatever we request and are mindful of, we generate.”

Tanaka’s instructor, dance champion Emmanuel Pierre-Antoine, repeatedly conveyed, “Focus on your present step and do it full-out, because your present step is what’s going to produce our next step.” When Tanaka became able to implement this advice into her dance work, she then translated that mindset into her corporate life. She connected to the concept of “manifesting” results rather than forcing them.

My favorite takeaways were: “Let’s try to make the best decisions we can in the moment; Just breathe; Let’s jump off that bridge when we get to it!”

At the conclusion of Becoming Ginger Rogers, Tanaka has reached the Silver level in Pro-Am ballroom competition. Her philosophy has evolved to using her energy in a more productive way. She has “aligned” the different facets of who she is to reinforce each other. Most importantly, she has reconnected with herself, physically and emotionally.

Before our conversation ended, Tanaka reiterated, “We must pursue our joy with a sense of urgency. We don’t have an infinite future.”

As we move into 2012, the target of “staying the in the present” with that joy is a valuable aspiration.

This article originally appeared on the women’s health site EmpowHER.

The EPA is under a court-ordered deadline to sign the final air toxics rule for power plants into law. The updated regulations were slated to put out new standards for power plants that burn coal and oil. The goal was to cut approximately 90 percent of the mercury emitted from exhaust within three years. Other pollutants, including heavy metals, arsenic, and acid gases, were to be addressed as well.

Teresa B. Clemmer

I reached out to Teresa B. Clemmer, Acting Director of the Environmental and National Resources Law Clinic and Associate Professor of Law at Vermont Law School, to ask why the EPA had not delivered a statement and to get a better understanding on the involved and circuitous rulemaking process.

“It’s not uncommon for EPA to miss deadlines,” Clemmer told me. “Sometimes EPA is hesitant to come out with final rulings on controversial issues,” she added. With a nod to the upcoming election, Clemmer stated, “President Obama needs to support the leadership of Lisa Jackson on critical public health and environmental issues and focus less on short term political considerations.” Since the EPA has missed the deadline, Clemmer believes the parties to the litigation prompting EPA’s action may be in the process of negotiating another extension of time.

Here’s the backstory:

• The1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act set forth a list of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP) that the EPA needed to regulate. Although the original list didn’t include mercury, provisions were included to study the health effects of mercury, technologies available to control its emissions, and the costs of such technologies.
• Although the EPA conducted the requisite studies, they missed the 1993 and 1994 statutory deadlines.  It wasn’t until December 2000 that the EPA finally made the determination that it was “appropriate and necessary” to regulate HAP emissions from coal-fired and oil-fired power plants.
• In 2004, the EPA issued Proposed Rules for Power Plants
• In 2005, the EPA Delisted Power Plants from regulation under the HAP program
• In 2008, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the EPA had unlawfully delisted power plants.  The parties to the litigation negotiated a deadline for a new rulemaking addressing toxic emissions from power plants, which was embodied in a court-approved consent decree. At one point the deadline was Nov. 16, 2011, and it was later extended to Dec. 16, 2011. This is the ruling that the public is waiting for.

In March 16, 2011, when the EPA proposed rules to regulate Mercury and other toxins from power plants their findings showed that:

• The proposed rule would reduce mercury emissions by 91% when fully implemented.
• By 2016, the proposed rule would avoid 6,800 to 17,000 premature deaths, and thousands of other related beneficial health effects.
• The total annual cost of the rule in 2016 would be $10.9 billion compared to the health benefits of $59 to $140 billion.

On the issue of mercury as a neurotoxin, Clemmens said unequivocally, “The toxicity is terrible for the development of young brains. Chronic exposure creates severe effects.”

Faulting the power industry for avoiding regulations for twenty years while air, water, and fish have been contaminated, Clemmens pointed to the strength of the coal lobby. She was direct in her opinions. “There is no such thing as clean coal. From cradle to grave, coal is a disaster. Mining it destroys landscapes, burning it generates huge quantities of ozone and particulate matter, toxic pollutants, and greenhouse gases. Disposing of its byproducts leads to the creation of toxic waste lagoons that are slowly and silently leaching into the water. At every stage of its life, coal is dangerous. It’s the single most responsible cause for the climate crisis.” She capped off her comments with the pronouncement, “Coal is a ticking time bomb.”

In response to those who play the “economic burden” card, Clemmer replied, “The owners and top executives in the coal industry are not in the business of creating jobs. Their main interest is in getting wealthy.” Rather than kicking the can down the road, Clemmer advocates focusing on the renewable forms of energy such as wind, solar, and geo-thermal.

Applauding the efforts of those citizens pushing back, Clemmer encouraged, “Get active and vocal, and stay involved. It really does work when elected officials hear from their constituents.”

Photo Courtesy of Mark Washburn

This article originally appeared on Moms Clean Air Force

The Paley Center in New York City and Los Angeles jointly hosted a jam packed twelve-hour day on December 1, under the banner of TEDxWomen. Pat Mitchell, who had instigated TEDWomen in 2010, spearheaded and hosted this year’s event which was billed as a “cross-disciplinary program” focusing on how women “think, work, communicate, collaborate, learn and lead.” Using the established TED structure, the talks were brief but pithy. The audience was expanded to over 100 linked events around the world (hence the X=independently organized). A live stream of the talks—and a constant flow of Tweets—amplified the conversation.

There were four sessions: Resilience, Relationships, Rebirth, and Reimagine. Strong representation was in evidence for young girls and older women, leaving some questions about if there could have been more content aimed at those in their thirties and forties. However, there was plenty of information, uplifting moments, and food for thought to keep the program vibrant and engaging. With the goal of using the platform to “spread ideas about women,” the mission was successful.

Gayle Tzemach-Lemmon, journalist and author, started the proceedings off with a combined narrative about the courageous women of Afghanistan and the struggles of her mother and grandmother. She said, “Women can make a difference. When we change the way we see ourselves, others will follow.”

The work that Rachel Simmons has been doing with The Girls Leadership Institute was a standout. She discussed how girls are under pressure to please others, striving for perfection and popularity. They grow into young women who don’t assert themselves, get paid less, and fear being seen as aggressive. Sharing the stage with her was Claire Sannini, an 8^th grader.

Pointing to the subliminal messages that are sent to children about who they can and cannot be, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, director of Miss Representation, pondered why there was still an “emphasis on looks for girls and leadership for boys.” She called on those in media and Hollywood to change the way they portrayed women and girls.

On the health front, surprise guest Barbra Streisand was on hand to deliver the fact that since1984, more women have died of heart disease than men. Streisand opined that there was a “boys club in the medical world.” “How can you treat a woman for a life threatening ailment based on male statistics?” she queried. In 2008, Streisand endowed 5 million dollars to Cedars-Sinai for the creation of the Barbra Streisand Women’s Cardiovascular Research and Education Program. Ironically, back in 1991, Dr. Bernadine Healy coined the term The Yentl Syndrome in a paper asserting that women were handled differently than men in the management of coronary heart disease. Streisand introduced Dr. Noel Bairey Merz, who underscored that “heart disease is now a women’s epidemic—with one out of two women being affected. She suggested, “Doing research and getting the word out is helping to bend the curve.”

The introduction to the Rebirth segment featured a performance by Iyeoka Okoawo, a Nigerian-American poet and musician, whose goal is to “move the world one poem at a time.” Jane Fonda led this portion, speaking about the “Longevity Revolution” and pushing back on the “age as pathology” syndrome. For her, the issue at hand was with women living longer, “how do we use this time?”  Referencing “aging as rebirth,” she suggested that part of the task was to review the preceding years to “free yourself from your past and change your relationship to yourself.” She referenced how neural pathways become hardwired in old patterns, but that if you can re-vision relationships—pathways can change and be the new norm.

Dr. Laura Carstensen also addressed the “graying of society,” noting that studies show older people engage with sadness more comfortably and view injustice with compassion, but not despair. Dr. Michelle Warren offered insights that a generation of women was suffering “due to a fear of hormones.” Dr. Mehmet Oz, a crowd favorite, shared a video of the first MRI of a female orgasm. His main takeaway was the importance of physical activity and how bone strength was helped by resistance exercise.

In a dialogue with Salamishah Tillet, Gloria Steinem displayed her usual wit in response to questions. On the issue of aging she joked, “My funeral will probably be a fundraiser!” However, she seriously touched on deep concerns, such as the importance of the role of women of color in the history of feminism. Steinem lamented the fact that “we put movements in silos, when the adversaries are all the same.” Once again, she promoted her belief that there was a need to “attribute an economic value to care giving”—which makes up one-third of the work in this country.

Two of the most intense presentations were delivered by girls. Girl Up, featuring Project Girl Theatre, had Fonda

Girl Up featauring Project Girl Performance Collective

in tears, pronouncing, “They give us hope. That’s the future. Who says there’s no young feminists!” Ivy Navarette and Shayna Welcher shared stories about their experiences as former gang members and how they turned their lives around by becoming involved with the LA Homegirl Café, where they are actively learning skills in the restaurant industry.

In the concluding portion, the “Google girls” were definite stars. All three had placed first in their respective age categories for the Google Science Fair. Listeners were agog with their depth of knowledge, as they explained their “projects.” Journalist Lisa Ling, anchoring the closing portion, suggested that they were the true celebrities of the future—not reality show personalities.

Shamila Kohestani, recounted her struggles in Afghanistan and her life under Taliban rule. Becoming the founder of the first female soccer team in her country had changed her personal landscape. It was chilling to hear her relate, “It was difficult playing soccer in a stadium where women were executed for crimes.” She added, “I want my story to be a source of hope. Please take a moment and think about how valuable your freedom is.”

For those attending who were older, the message was “the mistakes and experiences that we have had, make us who we are today.” For the younger women starting on their road, there were ample role models and the knowledge that they could be powerful in their own right. Tiffany Shlain, artist, filmmaker, and founder of the Webby Awards, emphasized that women will thrive in the new world of communication. She said, “It’s not the World Wide Web, it’s Women Wide Web!” As part of her wrap up she concluded, “If you want this world to be better, you have to believe in humanity.”

Los Angeles bade farewell to New York with the aphorism, “Interdependence. We are connected.” Judging from the atmosphere in the auditorium by late evening, women were feeling that energy.

Photos courtesy of Michael Priest Photography

This article originally appeared on the website VitaminW.

Setting the stage is information outlining how coal plays a part in the American energy equation:

• Almost one-half of the electricity in the United States comes from burning coal
• 16 pounds of coal are burned daily for every man, woman, and child in the United States
• One third of the coal comes from the mountains of Appalachia

Juxtaposed to this data is footage of ordinary people holding signs that read, “Stop Blasting: Save the Kids.” They are residents of Coal River Valley, West Virginia. Their goal is to protect Coal River Mountain, home to biologically diverse forests and their way of life. “People have had enough and they’re standing up to the coal companies,” says one demonstrator.

With the hopes of evening the odds in their battle, the West Virginia citizens reached out to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—an environmental lawyer with established creds. The film shows him as a 10-year-old, visiting his uncle John in the White House to discuss his concerns about the environment. Over forty years later, in the fall of 2009, he spoke to President Obama about the liabilities of mountain top coal mining.

Kennedy appears at pivotal moments throughout the film. He is the father of three children with asthma caused by “ozone and particulates from burning coal illegally.” Giving a brief history lesson, Kennedy discusses how regulations that were supposed to be in effect eighteen years ago were transformed when George W. Bush abolished the “New Source rule.” With a nod to ongoing arguments about the economy versus health priorities, Kennedy explains that up until the 1870s, if a factory in America emitted smoke that permeated your house, you had the right to shut them down. However, the laws were eroded by the Industrial Revolution, in order to facilitate the growth of manufacturing. Kennedy says flatly, “So we will allow industry to pollute.”

Walking through a destroyed mountaintop, Kennedy comments, “If the American people could see it, there would be a revolution in this country.” When directly confronting a coal company representative on how a demolished mountaintop has been reconstructed, Kennedy points out, “This is supposed to be a forest.” Reacting to the talking points response he receives, he asks sardonically, “How many lies do you have to tell to make this whole fiction work?”

There is ample footage that demonstrates exactly what transpires in order to extract

Maria Gunnoe at Mountaintop Removal Site. Photo courtesy of Vivian Stockman

coal from the Appalachian Mountains. First, the trees are cut down. Then the mountains are blasted. Boulders tumble down to the homes in the valley below, filled with silica dust (this contributes to the disease silicosis). With 2500 tons of explosives detonated daily, the mountains are reduced to rubble. Maria Gunnoe, a mother who comes from two generations of coal miners, conveys, “You feel like you’re under attack.” It happens several times a day as 800 to 900 feet are taken off a mountain and dumped in the valley. Gunnoe, who lives in Boone County, West Virginia, discusses how the persistent and severe flooding on her land pushed her to become proactive. A coal company engineer defends the rainfall flooding as, “Not our fault.” Rather, he attributes it to, “An act of God.” Gunnoe, previously a waitress, now works full time for the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition (OVEC), and is a powerful presence in the movie. Her concerns embrace not just those of ecological balance, but also the potential loss of Appalachian culture and heritage.

Those fighting tooth and nail to halt mountaintop removal have deep roots in the area. Bo Webb’s father was a coal miner. His family’s property on the banks of Coal River was homesteaded in the 1830s by previous generations. Destruction of the mountain ridge above his house pushed Webb to co-found the grassroots organization Mountain Justice Summer. Mountain removal mining has destroyed 500 Appalachian Mountains. This translates into one million acres of decimated forest and 2,000 miles of buried streams—with contamination of thousands of additional miles. The result is heavy metals in both well waters and springs.

Jennifer Hall-Massey, a resident of Prenter, West Virginia, joined with 264 neighbors to sue nine coal companies on the grounds that they were responsible for the contamination of the local water supplies. Their small enclave has witnessed a cluster of brain tumors, with fatalities including Hall-Massey’s 29-year-old brother. Hall-Massey points out that the national average for brain tumors is one in 100,000.

The Bruce Mansfield power plant, one of the country’s largest coal-fired facilities, is located a few miles from Shippingport, Pennsylvania. The plant has blanketed the town with toxic fly ash. There are eight children in the area with autism, including Susan Bird’s son. She has become part of the environmental group Penn Future to amplify her concerns. She asks ruefully, “As a parent, you sit there and wonder, did I do this? You know, if I lived somewhere else would he have been healthier?” Currently, researchers have undertaken a ten-year study on the relationship between autism and air borne pollutants.

The documentary makes it clear that the people pushing back are up against very heavy hitters. This includes representatives from both political parties, lobbyists for varied interests, as well as the coal industry. In 2004, George W. Bush, who received enormous contributions from the coal sector was quoted as saying of his re-election, “This is a coal-fired victory.”

Massey Energy (which was acquired by Alpha Natural Resources in 2011), and its CEO (through 2010) Don Blankenship, serve as the major representatives of the coal industry’s point of view. The largest coal company in West Virginia, Massey does more mountain top removal mining than any other company in the country. Their track record includes evicting the unions from their mines and replacing jobs with mechanization. Over the past thirty years, that move has increased production by 140 percent while shedding 40,000 jobs. Massey paid the largest fine in EPA history (20 million dollars) for over 60,000 violations. In 2010, twenty-nine Massey miners died in the worst American mine disaster since 1970. The company came under investigation later that year. During his eighteen-year tenure as CEO, Blankenship’s compensation was in excess of 190 million dollars.

Another one-time Massey employee, with a very different outlook, is Ed Wiley—who served as a contractor to the company. Little did he know that he would go head to head with his former boss. His mission was to fight for the health of his granddaughter and her classmates, who attended elementary school adjacent to a Massey industrial coal processing plant. The children and teachers were subjected to air borne coal dust sucked into the school’s ventilation system. Wiley describes the situation as “a hornets nest sitting over the school.” With an elevated rate of cancers and respiratory ailment in evidence, he becomes determined to have the school resituated. He marches with signs asking, “Massey: Why are you poisoning our kids?” He confronts then governor Joe Manchin, who self-identifies as a “friend of coal.” Pointing to his granddaughter Wiley instructs, “This is not an environmental issue, this is a little human being.” Along with Bo Webb and other members of the community, the town finally gets a new school—with Massey footing 20 percent of the bill.

Facts disseminated on screen point to the manifest impact of coal on health. Each year, emissions from coal-fired plants contribute to:

• More than 10 million asthma attacks
• Brain damage in up to 600,000 newborn children
• More than 43,000 premature deaths

Burning coal is the number one source of greenhouse gases worldwide. There are 600 coal-fired plants across the United States; their emissions cover the entire country. There are 600 ash ponds nationwide filled with 150 billion gallons of toxic sludge.

By focusing on the stories of those whose physical well being and families have been directly affected, The Last Mountain shows, in the words of director Bill Haney, “the power of ordinary citizens to remake the future when they have the determination and courage to do so.”

This article originally appeared on the website Moms Clean Air Force.

Women Without Borders is an international organization that works to research, advocate, and lobby globally for women. Last month they co-sponsored an evening at The Paley Center for Media, featuring a panel examining the role of women as peacemakers. Specifically addressed was the question, “Can Mothers Stop Terrorism.”  Edit Schlaffer facilitated the discussion.

Schlaffer founded Women Without Borders in 2002, with the mission of evolving a new way to heal grief and suffering on both sides of a conflict. Her belief was that women needed a way “to speak and develop reconciliation.” When initiated, the emphasis was on specific hotspots. However, Schlaffer realized after 9/11 that there was a “worldwide need” to make the whole international community safe. Stating that women hold up the fabric of society, Schlaffer stressed, “We have to recognize women as a key security block.”

Noting that problems extend beyond major recognized disputes, Schlaffer said, “It’s all over the place. We have to find common solutions.” She outlined the Women Without Borders formula: “We go to volatile places and try to create counter-narratives.” Currently involved in on the ground action in Yemen, Schlaffer reported that she was amazed by the vibrancy of their female civil society. Employing a methodology of asking women what they need, and then acting to empower them as change makers, Women Without Borders encourages women to adopt the role of advocates in their communities. This message had been translated into the tagline, “Include, Involve, Invest.”

A documentary short, Journey Through Darkness directed by Zia Trench, was screened. It profiled three women whose lives had been touched by terrorism. It was an introduction to SAVE—Sisters Against Violent Extremism—a counterterrorism platform founded in 2008 that strives to connect women to build a world “without violent extremism.” Participants are garnered from the ranks of peace and security experts, policy makers, and those who have survived terrorist attacks. Regional SAVE chapters have been established in India, Northern Ireland, Yemen, Pakistan, Israel/Palestine, Indonesia, and the United Kingdom, with plans being made to get addition sites up and running.

In 2008, the first SAVE conference was held in Vienna. As a result, a ten-point set of principles was drawn up, underscoring a call to action based on the premise of non-violence and co-existence. Included were generating “awareness for not stigmatizing the families of extremists/terrorists” and issuing a declaration to support “the younger generation with non-violent alternative in their search for a better life.” These two positions support women who have lived through terrorism. Growing from this premise was the Mothers for Change! research project, which was developed to give women the tools to recognize and challenge extremist ideology within their families and societies.

Schlaffer said, “Sustainability comes from local mothers. However, women may not be aware of their power. They need to learn how to harness that.” She said that if mothers suspect that their children have been solicited for extreme ideology, instead of hiding or ignoring the problem, they “must deal with it—as change comes from the mother.” Hot lines have been set up to call if they need help or have questions.

The work of Women Without Borders is based on case studies and a collection of information. Schlaffer pointed out, “There is no rush to short sighted action. When bringing together women from opposite sides of an issue, the goal is to explore the potential for change in civil society—that can expand to higher levels.” Most importantly Schlaffer added, “The people have to buy into it.”

Present to discuss her experiences was Aicha el-Wafi, the mother of Zacarias Moussaoui, imprisoned for life after he was convicted of conspiring with the 9/11 hijackers. She is a woman who evokes strong empathy as she narrates her personal background, which included a forced marriage at age fourteen. El-Wafi stayed with her husband for eleven years, despite being subjected to domestic violence. When she left the relationship, she had the responsibility of caring for four children. Working ten hour days as a seamstress, she simultaneously took courses to perfect her French.” She tried to give everything she never had to her children, because as she said, “Marrying at fourteen destroyed me.”

Speaking through an interpreter, el-Wafi described raising her son in France. When asked if she had seen any signs of him becoming radicalized she responded, “I never saw it. He was a very nice boy. When my son was home, we had friends of all religions.”

El-Wafi referenced other factors that she believed had impacted her son’s psyche and personal path. In addition to the lack of a father’s presence in his life, el-Wafi described the persistent racism her son encountered in his French birth country. Although her son was treated with ethnic discrimination while studying for his baccalauréat, he achieved his degrees. It was Sheik Abdullah el-Faisal that el-Wafi accused of destroying her son—“and other families.”

Schlaffer pointed out, “We need to send a strong message to mothers that they are not alone.” Widening the reference, she underscored creating “a safe space for women to be heard.” As part of the Women Without Borders program, el-Wachi speaks frequently, representing her story to audiences worldwide. She said to those present, “You have to know the other person—or there is fear. We are all human beings. To live together, there has to be tolerance and respect.”

Toward the end of the evening, Schlaffer, summarized the goals of Women Without Borders commenting, “We look for the strong voices of women.”

In Aicha el-Wafi, they have found one.