Jenni Williams and Magondonga Mahlangu formed WOZA (the acronym is also a Ndebele word for "come forward") in 2002 after Robert Mugabe, who has ruled Zimbabwe since 1980, claimed victory in an election that many believe was fraudulent. The group has held more than 100 peaceful demonstrations since 2002, many of which resulted in arrests and beatings for WOZA members and founders. Together, Williams and Mahlangu have been arrested more than 50 times. They have been subjected to beatings by Mugabe's policeman, held in overcrowded cells, and repeatedly strip searched, all for their participation in nonviolent protests. But WOZA continues undeterred, and only asks that its members come to demonstrations prepared for jail, leaving any children and medication at home.

More than 70,000 Zimbabweans consider themselves members of WOZA. Williams and Mahlangu estimate that more than 3,000 of their number have been arrested for demonstrating. However, the central tenant of WOZA is nonviolence, and the founders insist that no matter what happens, WOZA members must not strike back. They explain that their movement has been modeled after the work of Martin Luther King, Jr. Says Williams: "We do it for social justice."

Their most recent struggle began a year ago, when they were attacked and jailed for leading a sit-in to demand food for starving Zimbabweans, the Record Eagle reports. They also asked that Mugabe share power with Morgan Tsvangirai, who ran against Mugabe in a controversial election last year. They ultimately hope that Zimbabwe will be able to write a homegrown constitution, which could lead to real elections not determined by government intimidation and corruption.

Tonight Mahlangu will be at the White House to receive an award from the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial, which honors individuals who have made a significant contribution to human rights in their country. Winners are selected by an independent panel of experts. According to Monika Kaira Varma, director of the Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights, the award is intended to show support for WOZA at a particularly difficult time: "When they are doing the most difficult things, we want to let them know that we stand in solidarity with WOZA. This is about the people."

Zimbabwe Women, Receiving Rights Award, Speak Out [Record-Eagle]
President Obama Presents Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award To Magodonga Mahlangu [Examiner]
Zimbabwean Rights Organization To Get Kennedy Award [Washington Times]

When National Geographic first ran images of the Padaung, it was anthropological gawking - but the "exotic women" whose collarbones had been depressed from early childhood with heavy brass rings, had at least been photographed on their own turf. Now, as refugees from devastated, war-torn Burma, they're a popular tourist attraction in neighboring Thailand - brought in by entrepreneurs who keep them in an artificial village they're not allowed to leave. And, as the Washington Post's Amit R. Paley found, it's a sad and complex situation.

While many consider this a human rights violation so heinous that more scrupulous travel companies refuse to sponsor tours to their village, others are more pragmatic: for the refugees, some defenders - and, indeed, villagers themselves- claim, it's better than the dangers of Burma, and gives them a chance to make money by selling handicrafts to tourists or charging for photographs. Said the Seattle PI's Denis Gray when he visited their compound a decade ago, "Economically it's a virtually perfect arrangement. Everyone gets a cut — the once impoverished Padaung, Thai businessmen and government tax collectors, even a rebel group that uses the money to finance its war with the military regime in Burma."

Morally, it's far from perfect. Whatever the villagers' feelings about the situation, they're clearly being exploited. Thailand, which has given them asylum, is profiting. And the Tales of Asia blog points out that the practice is actually in violation of UN High Commission for Refugees guidelines, which prohibits putting refugees "on display." While no one whom the Post's Paley spoke to claimed to be ill-treated, the facts are still shocking.

"Why do we wear the rings?" said Mamombee, 52, whose neck seemed particularly elongated. "We do it to put on a show for the foreigners and tourists!" I couldn't tell if she was joking...There were no guards around, and it did not look to me as if anyone would physically stop the women from leaving. When I asked how they had arrived at this village, they said a man named U Dee, whom they referred to as "the middleman," first began bringing Padaung to the spot about three years ago. There are now about 50 families there, including some from a tribe known as "the long ears" because they stretch their lower earlobes by wearing enormous rings.Some families said they were paid about $45 a month, while others were given a sack of rice. One orphan girl said she was not paid at all. All the women and girls tried to raise extra money by selling trinkets or charging money to be photographed. The women are not allowed to leave the one-acre village. Groceries and other supplies are brought in by motorcycle every day. "We have to stay with the middleman," Mamombee said. "If I leave, he might call immigration."

The issue of the body modification rings themselves - which many regard as mutilation, imposed on girls when they're too young to object - is controversial anyway, but becomes more so when the suspicion intrudes that the need for tourism may encourage the practice. As Gray explains,

Tourism has, at least for the time being, preserved a custom that had begun to disappear as the Padaung came into contact with the outside world.Traditionally, only Padaung girls born on a Wednesday of a full moon were destined to have their necks fitted with the coils, but now other youngsters are enlisted to meet the tourist demand...Only initial discomfort is reported after the coils are set and as the distance from ear lobe to collar bone lengthens to as much as 10 inches, more than double the average. The only danger posed is if the coils are removed. Suffocation could result since the neck muscles are so weak they cannot support the head.

It may be true that as refugees the Padaung would have limited options. Perhaps, given the choice, many of them would still opt to work the tourist trade; we can't know. But choice is the operative word: without that, it's a poor sort of asylum. And any tourists who thinks they're observing tradition should know they're seeing something far more modern - but at the same time, just as sadly old as commerce and exploitation.

A Village, Or A Zoo? [Washington Post]
The Padaung Longnecks…[TalesofAsia]
Padaung 'Giraffe Women' [Seattle PI]

A British court has granted the woman anonymity, but she reportedly comes from a wealthy family in Saudi Arabia, and is married to a member of the royal family. (Her husband and her relatives have cut off contact with her.) Her fears of stoning are not unfounded — 40 women have been executed in Saudi Arabia since 1990, and one currently awaits stoning for adultery. (She had a child six years after her husband died.) Another princess, Mishaal bint Fahd, was executed by "gunshot to the head" after admitting adultery in 1977. After a British documentary was made about her execution, the Saudi government expelled the British ambassador, pulled members of their royal family out of Britain, and canceled lucrative export contracts.

It is likely fear of such retaliation that makes the British government keep asylum deals like the princess's a secret. Robert Verkaik of the Independent writes that to make public such deals "would in effect be to highlight the persecution of women in Saudi Arabia, which would be viewed as open criticism of the House of Saud and lead to embarrassing publicity for both governments." (Interestingly, the Obama Administration, as reported last week, is softening the United States' stance on granting asylum for victims of domestic abuse.) But in keeping secret Saudi Arabia's human rights abuses, Britain is essentially protecting the Saudi government from any international pressure to change.

Note: The Muslim pilgrims pictured are stoning a pillar as part of a religious ceremony; they are not participating in an execution.

Princess Facing Saudi Death Penalty Given Secret UK Asylum [Independent]
Saudi Princess Given Asylum In UK Over Fears She Faces Execution For Having Illegitimate Child With British Lover [Daily Mail]
Saudi Arabian Princess Seeks Asylum In Britain Over Illegitimate Child [Telegraph]

One fashion insider has seen the light, and with the zeal of a convert, is preaching the Gospel of sustainability! A former influential fashion editor, Charty Durrant writes in Resurgence mag,

As a fashion editor of twenty years' standing I have found it extremely uncomfortable to admit that the seemingly harmless fashion industry is actually driving our demise. It is at the heart of all that ails us; pull at any social or environmental thread, and it will lead you back to the fashion industry.

We've talked a good bit about the consequences of fast fashion and the virtues - green, moral, aesthetic, and philosophical - of returning to a simpler and higher-quality way of being. A few months ago, I forswore fast fashion, and, Katy Perry-style, I liked it. The first few weeks were embarrassingly challenging, since I was used to breezing through Forever21 on my lunch break, or picking up basics at H&M. But weighing purchases, buying for quality and thinking about what I need have, in fact, saved me some money and made me feel better about what I wear. I went into Forever21 last week, by way of experiment, and I was shell-shocked: stuff felt so crappy! All the mass-market creativity looked so soulless! I bought a $7 necklace!

I got my just desserts when I got a rash, and then it hooked on the back of a chair and broke. But it did underscore the challenges of giving up easy gratification. Even stepping into that Forever21, I began to doubt myself, to crave novelty, to need a hit of of-the-minute. Which, apparently, runs pretty deep as we've come to take constant novelty as our due. Says Durrant,

As the ‘trend frenzy' deepens, we can see that fashion is no longer about style and self-expression: it is primarily about judgment – self-judgment and judgment of others. A toxic media reporting how women ought to look, and celebrity obsession further enforce this strange new paradigm...In the end the true antidote is to adopt an attitude of voluntary simplicity. A manner of living and being that is outwardly more simple and inwardly more rich. A way of being in which our most authentic and alive self is brought into direct conscious contact with every part of our lives.

That's all well and good. But the sad truth is that things aren't quite this simple, and she's talking about two issues, the philosophical and the gray-shaded reality. I used to be all about the boycotts, but a global industry is built on the backs of our fast fashion addiction, and wearing locally made, good-quality clothing in New York doesn't guarantee a better life for anyone - in many cases, quite the opposite. If we boycott, it must be mindfully - and not in a vacuum. Inaction, at the end of the day, is still that. Yes, research companies, and support those fighting the good fight and running good factories, rewarding and reinforcing rather than just punishing. Is "fast fashion" bad? Sure, but as a phenomenon, it's less evil than the specifics of unsafe, unsanitary working conditions or companies who fail to pay a living wage. We need to think not just of our own souls and worthiness, but of real issues like the economic viability of those people who produce clothing. Boycott? Simplify? Yes. But also research, donate, and be mindful of shades of gray. Most of all, let's break our addiction to easy answers.

Dressing Ourselves To Death [Utne]
The Tyranny Of Trends [Resurgence]

Organic And Fair Trade Clothing Directory [Resurgence]

Related: Do You Know Where Your Clothes Come From?
We Love Cheap Stuff, But Fast Fashion Is Hard To Defend
Slow Hand: Native American Dresses, Forever21, Kilts, And The Recession

The 23-minute film by Lisa Russell, which is available for viewing online, follows two young women who are seeking safe abortions after being assaulted. The film was produced by Ipas, a nongovernmental organization dedicated to preventing deaths and disabilities from unsafe abortions. According to the organization, 67,000 women die every year from unsafe abortions across the world, and more than half of the deaths occur in Africa.

In 2004 the Ethiopian Parliament approved a new law legalizing abortion for minors, women who have been raped, and cases in which the mother's life is in danger. However, due to a lack of supplies and education, legal abortions are still extremely hard to come by. In Ethiopia unsafe abortions, including ingesting herbs and placing objects in the uterus, are still the second leading cause of death for women of child-bearing age.

Tigist, who is now 20, was raped while working in a tea room by a man whose marriage proposal she refused. When her employer found out, she was kicked out of her home and lost her job. In the clip above, she seeks treatment at a local health center, but is told the facility can only perform the abortion in the first trimester, and she is three months and 15 days pregnant.

Eventually, she gets an abortion at a regional hospital. In an interview posted on Shakesville, filmmaker Lisa Russell said, "Tigist life will has changed remarkably after having the procedure. She can go on to get a job, get an education, and pursue her goals."

Saba Kidanemariam, who works at Ipas Ethiopia says in the documentary that she doesn't feel that if a young woman gets pregnant she should be blamed because society has failed her. "Maybe the information she needs she is not getting, services she might need, she is not getting," says Kidanemariam. "Society is responsible for this. It should have been her right to get services, to get information, and to live as a person is entitled."

Watch Not Yet Rain [NotYetRain.org]
Not Yet Rain Debut And Interview With Filmmaker [Shakesville]
Not Yet Rain [Feministe]

As a feminist, I want to not define what is right and wrong for somebody else, but I recognize that some women and men don't make the choice to be sex workers as much as they are pushed or fall into it for the wrong reasons. As a politically-inclined person, I am keen to see as many people participating in the political process as possible, and I'm keenly aware that sex workers aren't accorded the rights here that they deserve. As a woman, I'm bothered to find out that a lover or a boyfriend has patronized a prostitute and I'm never keen on them going to strip clubs. And, frankly, I've walked past the strip clubs on M Street enough to know that the objectification that goes on in there doesn't stay behind those closed doors — and while I blame the men that stare at my tits, I can't honestly say I never blame the owners of the naked breasts those men were recently drooling over. And so I put on my 5 inch heels and teetered over to BeBar on 9th Street last night to check it out. And it turns out the way to reconcile 15 different points of view on sex work is really easy — you just spend the night talking to sex workers and their friends and supporters outside of the contexts of their jobs.

I met a lot of cool people last night from all walks of life (and including one Jezebel commenter) all of whom were there to support the cause of treating sex workers more like normal working people. The folks I spoke with want the rest of us to know that they didn't all get into sex work because they were abused or on drugs and that, for some of them, it's just a job like any other. It's work which, like your job, can be fun or monotonous, intellectually stimulating or a reason to read Jezebel all day at your desk, physically demanding or a reason for your butt to spread like mine. There's no one reason people choose to get into sex work or stay in sex work.

And prostitutes don't just face discrimination and condemnation from women, they face it from their own clients. They also face serious risks, like diseases and beatings. The police tend to go after sex workers rather than the clients — just ask David Vitter what charges he faced for using the D.C. Madam's services, or Senator Debbie Stabenow's husband (who turned state's evidence against the prostitute he hired). In D.C., the city has designated certain places prostitute-free zones, in which people who "look like" prostitutes can be arrested for having prior charges or more than 3 condoms on them — and where transgendered people are often harassed. So, while having (and using) condoms is taking an active approach to one's own safety and that of one's clients (and their current or future partners), it's actually punishable by law in D.C.. Great plan there, guys.

The groups that sponsored last night's event — HIPS, $PREAD Magazine and Different Avenues — are working not to eliminate sex work, but to make it a safe alternative for the women and men who choose to do it, and to help those that don't feel free to choose to leave to get out. They provide testing services, counseling, drug programs, social support services and outreach in addition to working to educate the public and our elected representatives about what's being done wrong and right in regards to sex work. Plus they throw really interesting parties where they help get people registered to vote.

At the end, the sex workers I was talking to and I came to an agreement. If a woman's husband or boyfriend is utilizing a sex worker's services (and, God forbid, leaves her with some consequences of his actions), we should blame him and not the sex worker. The sex worker was just doing his or her job, not trying to hurt anyone else.