To the Men Who Send Women Hate Mail

PUBLISHED 5/15/2026 by

I am not alone in receiving unsolicited emails—especially as a professor, public writer and thinker, and woman who dares to speak her mind. Often, the emails are thoughtful, engaging and sometimes deeply moving expressions of gratitude that warm the heart. However, from time to time, there are the crude, crass and obtuse intruders, thrusting insults and even threats into our inboxes. These expressions of masculine fragility and anger—whether intended to or not—chill the receiver’s speech and cause women to silence themselves.  

Here, then, is my response to Mr. Sawyer—but also, in many ways, a response to the countless men who insert themselves into women’s inboxes with condescension, hostility and misplaced certainty. Women in public life know these messages well: the unsolicited lectures, the attempts at intimidation, the casual cruelty masquerading as critique. Consider this every woman’s letter to the crass and crude male intruder in her inbox. I hope you enjoy.

No Women Were Present at the U.S.-China Negotiations. This Is By Design.

PUBLISHED 5/15/2026 by

Weekend Reading on Women’s Representation is a compilation of stories about women’s representation in politics, on boards, in sports and entertainment, in judicial offices and in the private sector in the U.S. and around the world—with a little gardening and goodwill mixed in for refreshment!

This week:
—Mexico continues to bet the U.S. on women’s political representation.
—A brief explanation on the Supreme Court’s attack on voting rights.
—In a 2028 presidential nomination poll, women lead among Democrats.
—Denise Powell earns a primary nod in a hotly contested Nebraska congressional race.

… and more.

A Government for Big Tobacco and Bigger Families

PUBLISHED 5/14/2026 by

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) made multiple headlines this week—starting with the on-again-off-again tenure of Dr. Marty Makary in his role as FDA commissioner. The FDA has drawn the ire of antiabortion activists over the agency’s approach to mifepristone regulation, including its approval last year of a generic version of the drug.

A so-called “safety report” on mifepristone, commissioned by HHS, is not due to be issued by the FDA until the fall, keeping the issue out of the public eye in the leadup to the midterms. (The timing, quite frankly, is a boon to Republicans.)

The real concern that appears to have been the final straw for the commissioner? Flavored vapes. Whereas the White House has been waging a campaign to appease tobacco donors by authorizing mint, tea and spice-flavored e-cigarettes, in March, the FDA issued a memo saying that it would draw the line at fruit and candy flavors. (Always looking out for the kids.) Yet somehow last week, blueberry and mango made it over the finish line. Sweet enough to satisfy Big Tobacco? Time will tell.

There’s nothing quite like coining a word like “under-babied” while peddling fruity vapes—all while gas prices are soaring, workplace benefits for parents are being rolled back, health insurance remains out of reach for millions, affordable housing is an oxymoron, and on and on.

Such is the legacy of a single week of news out of our nation’s top federal health agency.

The Supreme Court Keeps Mifepristone Available by Mail as Litigation Continues

PUBLISHED 5/14/2026 by | UPDATED 5/15/2026 at 10:33 A.M. PT

The mifepristone case that has landed on the Supreme Court’s shadow docket is the new face of conservative efforts to impose a nationwide ban on abortion.

It’s possible that the Court is close and needs a little more time to reach a decision. There has been some thought it might set the case for argument on the merits as early as next month, or more realistically, next term, and decide it on the merits quickly, at least as courts count time.

But given the political weight of the issue in a midterm election year, the Court could also return to its history with mifepristone: kicking the can down the road. That’s what they did when the Texas case, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA, came before it in June 2024, deciding that the plaintiffs lacked standing and dismissing the case, instead of ruling on the substantive issue.

The Supreme Court Preserved Mail-Order Abortion Pills—for Now. Julie Kay Says Providers Are Still Preparing.

PUBLISHED 5/14/2026 by | UPDATED 5/15/2026 at 12:02 P.M. PT

Thursday, May 14, at 5 p.m. ET, the Supreme Court’s temporary stay in the mifepristone case is set to expire, once again leaving abortion providers, patients and advocates waiting to see whether the Court will extend the pause, or allow the Fifth Circuit’s restrictions on mifepristone to take effect.

If the Court does nothing, the lower-court ruling could snap back into place, threatening mail-order and telemedicine access to mifepristone, one of the two drugs commonly used in medication abortion.

But abortion rights advocates say the story does not end there. Telemedicine abortion networks, shield-law protections, advance provision and community-based access have already reshaped abortion care in the post-Dobbs landscape—and those systems are continuing to evolve.

Julie F. Kay, a human rights lawyer and founder and executive director of Reproductive Futures, has spent years working at the intersection of reproductive rights, telemedicine abortion and shield-law protections. She co-founded the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine, challenged Ireland’s abortion ban before the European Court of Human Rights, and co-authored Controlling Women: What We Must Do Now to Save Reproductive Freedom.

Keeping Score: Supreme Court Blow to Voting Rights Will ‘Silence Our Voices’; Conservative Judges Try to Restrict Mifepristone; Moms Worry About Putting Food on the Table

PUBLISHED 5/14/2026 by | UPDATED 5/15/2026 at 10:38 A.M. PT

In every issue of Ms., we track research on our progress in the fight for equality, catalogue can’t-miss quotes from feminist voices and keep tabs on the feminist movement’s many milestones. We’re Keeping Score online, too—in this biweekly roundup.

This week:
—The Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, slashing protections against racially discriminatory voting laws.
—A record high amount of books were censored from libraries in 2025, often due to LGBTQ characters or plotlines addressing racism.
—A third of moms living on low incomes have gone into debt or skipped meals so their kids could eat.
—Just 22 percent of American voters have significant confidence in the Supreme Court.
—In 2025 the number of abortions in the U.S. remained stable, but more patients in states with bans turned to telehealth services instead of traveling out of state.
—The Department of Justice announced plans to expand the use of the federal death penalty.
—An Epstein-Maxwell survivor, who asked to remain anonymous, laments, “I kept my identity protected as Jane Doe. I woke up one day with my name mentioned over 500 times. While the rich and powerful remain protected by redaction, my name was exposed to the world.”
—The Trump administration launched a Moms.gov site on Mother’s Day that refers pregnant people to unregulated crisis pregnancy centers.
—A Ms. piece on solitary confinement by Kwaneta Harris and her daughter Summer Knight won Kwaneta second place in the Collaboration category of the Stillwater Awards for prison journalism.
—Liberation, a play about 1970s feminism by Bess Wohl, won the Pulitzer Prize for drama. It was also nominated for the Tony Award for Best Play. Wohl was inspired by her own life: Her mother, Lisa Cronin Wohl, was an early Ms. contributor.

… and more.

‘They’re Taking Our Humanity Away’: Kimberlé Crenshaw on Her Memoir, America’s Future and Why the Fight for Justice Requires ‘Backtalking’

PUBLISHED 5/14/2026 by

For decades, pioneering legal scholar and activist Kimberlé Crenshaw has shaped the language we use to understand systemic injustice—from coining the term “intersectionality” to helping launch the #SayHerName movement.

In her new memoir, Backtalker: An American Memoir, Crenshaw traces the personal and political experiences that shaped her work, while warning that the attacks on critical race theory, feminism and Black women are inseparable from the broader erosion of democracy itself.

In this wide-ranging interview, Crenshaw reflects on Anita Hill, Clarence Thomas, “intersectional failure,” the backlash against Black women leaders and the dangers of what historian Timothy Snyder calls “anticipatory compliance.” She argues that today’s political moment—from attacks on independent journalism to the dismantling of civil rights protections—demands a more expansive understanding of solidarity and resistance.

“The other side doesn’t want us to feel empathy,” Crenshaw says. “They’re taking our humanity away, the thing that makes us humans and not a machine.”

Crenshaw also speaks candidly about the personal costs of “backtalking” to power, the unfinished grief that continues to shape her activism, and why she still believes collective action and moral clarity matter.

“One step forward can lead to five or 10 steps back,” she says. “When we see the forces of retrenchment coming on the horizon, we must pick up every weapon we have to fight against it.”

There Is Danger in Silence: How to Mobilize Your Friends and Neighbors Into an ‘I Will Not Be Quiet’ Chapter

PUBLISHED 5/12/2026 by

In 2016, just after President Donald Trump was elected to his first term, a small group of women crowded together in an apartment in Brooklyn. While balancing mugs and sitting crisscross on the floor, they began to share what they had been afraid to say out loud. The practice caught on and, in time, the group expanded, becoming the national community group I Will Not Be Quiet. 

You don’t need much to start your I Will Not Be Quiet chapter. You don’t need any training, or even a big group of people. All you need is a few people and a space where you can sit together as a collective.

Afghan Women’s Refugee Football Team Officially Recognized by FIFA in Landmark Victory

PUBLISHED 5/12/2026 by

For the first time since the Taliban’s return to power in 2021 that forced Afghan women athletes into exile, Afghanistan’s women’s refugee football team has officially been granted recognition to compete in international tournaments under FIFA. This decision marks a rare and meaningful victory for Afghan women, whose rights, education and participation in public life have been systematically erased under Taliban rule for the past five years.

The FIFA Council announced the team formerly known as Afghan Women United will now be recognized as the Afghanistan women’s football team, allowing the players to compete in international competitions despite the Taliban-controlled Afghan Football Federation refusing to acknowledge women’s sports.

The players are now expected to participate in future international competitions and could potentially enter qualification for the 2028 Olympic Games in Los Angeles.

For many Afghan women, the moment carries meaning far beyond World Cup football. It serves as a reminder that despite years of repression, Afghan girls and women have not abandoned their ambitions, talents or dreams. Even after being pushed out of schools, workplaces, stadiums and public life, they continue to fight for spaces where they can exist freely and represent themselves on the world stage.

Nazia Ali, an Australia-based player on the team, reflected on the emotional significance of once again being able to represent Afghanistan officially. “For the last few years, we have played under many names—as refugees, as Afghan Women United, and as guests of other clubs—but in our hearts, we were always the national team.”