Write a summary based on this article:

In the battle of the sexes, new UBC research suggests that men may be stronger physically but women have much greater muscle endurance than their male counterparts.

 In a new study from UBC's Okanagan campus, researchers in the School of Health and Exercise Sciences have found that women are considerably less exhausted after natural, dynamic muscle exercises than men of similar age and athletic ability.

 "We've known for some time that women are less fatigable than men during isometric muscle tests -- static exercises where joints don't move, such as holding a weight -- but we wanted to find out if that's true during more dynamic and practical everyday movements," says Assistant Professor Brian Dalton. "And the answer is pretty definitive: women can outlast men by a wide margin."

 In his study, done in collaboration with the University of Guelph and University of Oregon, Dalton recruited eight men and nine women that were at a similar level of physical fitness. Participants were asked to flex their foot against a suite of sensors as quickly as they could 200 times. The speed, power and torque of their movements and electrical activity of their muscles was then captured and recorded over time.

 "We chose to measure foot movements because it makes use of calf muscles on the back of the leg, which are essential for practical, everyday tasks like standing and walking," says Dalton. "What we found is that males were faster and more powerful at first but became more fatigued much faster than females."

 While only one isolated muscle group was studied, Dalton says he would expect similar results for other muscles groups and his results are consistent with what has been observed elsewhere.

 "We know from previous research that for events like ultra-trail running, males may complete them faster but females are considerably less tired by the end," he adds. "If ever an ultra-ultra-marathon is developed, women may well dominate in that arena."

 But it's not all about competition. Dalton says his results can also inform more practical applications, such as designing exercise programs or even adapting work environments to minimize work-related fatigue and improve overall productivity.

 "We may, for example, want to lower the load for males, even though they may be stronger at the outset, to more closely match the endurance observed in females," he says. "Both sexes have valuable physical abilities and it only makes sense that we study and develop the tools to afford them the best advantage."

 "There's no battle at all," he jokes. "Maybe more of a balance of the sexes."

 ###

 The study appears in the June 2017 issue of Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism and was conducted with financial support from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

 Media Contact:

 Nathan Skolski

 Associate Director, Public Affairs | University Relations

 The University of British Columbia | Okanagan campus

 Phone: 250-807-9926 | Cell: 778-628-3093

 Email: nathan.skolski@ubc.ca ||||| “What’s the equivalent of the four-minute mile for women?” The question was casually thrown out in a group of about ten sports-minded women, a mix of athletes and business leaders. We were all gathered around a big open table inside Oiselle headquarters in Seattle. There was no immediate answer, and the question lingered awkwardly in the air.

 “4:40?” Someone said. “4:40 or 4:30?”

 Another long pause. “4:30, definitely 4:30.”

 There were a few nods, but the long pause and the unfamiliarity with this number, 4:30, tinged the air with sadness. Here we were, a group of avid runners, some with athletic careers spanning more than two decades, including a Division 1 runner and several post-collegiate athletes, and yet the question and the answer felt foreign. How are our own benchmarks so unfamiliar?

 On the men’s side, the milestones are easy to call up, featuring names you’ve heard hundreds of times: Roger Bannister, the four-minute mile; the life and death of Steve Prefontaine; the “World’s Fastest Man” and its parade of kings—Lewis, Johnson, Bolt.

 It’s not that the women’s side of the sport hasn’t had fearless protagonists and watershed moments. There’s Wilma Rudolph, the iconic sprinter of the 1950s and ’60s who became the first American woman to win three Olympic golds in track and field. There’s Joan Benoit-Samuelson, the first ever women’s Olympic marathon champion. And many more. But their stories are less well-known outside the insular running world. And when you look closer at the dominant narratives for female athletes, it becomes clear that many are not focused on a woman’s heroic talent or strength but center more around the simple concept of inclusion.

 In 1967, Kathrine Switzer became the first registered woman to run the Boston Marathon. Her finish time (4 hours and 20 minutes) is infrequently cited; it’s not considered the point. Few people realize that Switzer went on to run 2:51 at the New York City Marathon in 1975, making her the third-fastest American woman marathoner at the time. Instead, the picture of the race director attempting to physically remove her from the course is one of the most iconic images of a female athlete.

 In 1972, the passage of Title IX made it illegal to discriminate against female participation in sports at federally funded schools. And it’s often Title IX—rather an individual or her athletic achievements—that’s cited to celebrate progress for women in sports. Title IX was pivotal, but isn’t it reasonable to ask for more? Haven’t we earned the right to have athletic traditions and narratives that go beyond simply being allowed to participate?

 The predictable counterpoint to all of this is that the dearth of women’s milestones and tradition is a result of our relatively recent entry into competitive sports—we’ve been sending large numbers of women through the college sports system only for about 45 years. But unfortunately, the tradition of nontradition marches on.

 This spring, Nike made its attempt to break the two-hour barrier in the marathon, Breaking2, with no female equivalent in sight. The men’s goal is not to be discounted. It’s so ambitious that Nike built a special shoe, recruited world-class pacers, and guided the lead athlete, Eliud Kipchoge, with a laser pointer through every step. The company then poured millions of dollars into the creation of a moment—and an incredible moment it was. People from all over the world watched the live broadcast and followed it on social media.

 But where is the women’s Breaking2? Was it never even considered because, like the four-minute mile, we lack a goal with numeric roundness? Or was it because the company—and the industry itself—lacks the necessary interest and creativity to define what the equivalent mark would be for women? (The world record progression suggests that a sub-2:12 women’s marathon, three minutes faster than Paula Radcliffe’s world record of 2:15, is the number to chase. Though others have argued that Radcliffe’s time may be even closer to the women’s equivalent of a sub-two-hour performance.)

 Round numbers are nice, but women’s participation in sports is about more than that. Tradition is a result of both cultural reverence and the way we tell stories about female athletes. This means sharing those moments with a broader audience so we understand the significance of the feat. For example, Emma Coburn’s recent gold medal at the IAAF World Championships was one of the most iconic, exciting races in recent running history, for men or women. Don’t take my word for it. Watch it.

 Regardless of the sport, milestones and lore give sports fans and participants something to look toward, celebrate, talk about, and even shoot for.

 But traditions are also an investment that must compound over time. After all, it’s easy to celebrate a single moment—like Joan Benoit’s winning of the Olympic marathon. But we must continue to cherish its value, emphasize the tradition it started, and at the same time be on the lookout for what’s next.

 So, as our team pondered the women’s equivalent for the four-minute mile, we concluded with a directive: We would put a stake in the ground for the women’s mile. We would add our voices to a nascent group that was already talking about sub-4:30. (Bring Back the Mile, a website and community that aims to reestablish the mile as a preeminent distance in the United States, has done an excellent job of tracking the American women who have broken 4:30.) The sub-4:30 club is a rarefied group—even more so than the sub-four-minute milers, a mark that almost 500 American men have achieved. Only 71 American women have broken 4:30 (including former Oiselle athletes Kate Grace, Lauren Penney, and Amanda Winslow).

 The 4:30 mile. We will shout it from the rooftops, drop it into casual conversations, and speak of the women who break it with reverence. Because as it turns out, if we want someone to be a household name, we might have to build the houses.

 Sally Bergesen (@oiselle_sally) is the founder and CEO of Oiselle, a Seattle-based athletic apparel company and athlete sponsor by and for women. |||||

– Guys might be good at carrying heavy furniture but they tire faster than their female counterparts, new research out of the University of British Columbia shows. "We've known for some time that women are less fatigable than men during isometric muscle tests—static exercises where joints don't move, such as holding a weight—but we wanted to find out if that's true during more dynamic and practical everyday movements," says UBC researcher Brian Dalton in a press release. "And the answer is pretty definitive: women can outlast men by a wide margin." Collaborating with the University of Guelph and University of Oregon, the researchers report in the journal Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism that a handful of men and women were asked to flex their foot against sensors as fast as they could 200 times. Those sensors captured several metrics, including speed, power, torque, and even electrical activity in their muscles. The men were both faster and more powerful, but they also became more fatigued "much faster" than the women. Dalton notes that in ultra-trail running, men tend to be faster, but women tend to be far less tired; in fact in Outside, one runner calls for separate goals for women. "If ever an ultra-ultra-marathon is developed, women may likely dominate," Dalton says. But as for the Mars-vs.-Venus battle, Dalton jokes, "there's no battle at all. Maybe more of a balance of the sexes." More seriously: "Both sexes have valuable physical abilities and it only makes sense that we study and develop the tools to afford them the best advantage." (Sex gets better with age for women.)


Article:

Following through on the deep constitutional concerns stated in its prior Northwest Austin decision, a majority of the Court seems committed to invalidating Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and requiring Congress to revisit the formula for requiring preclearance of voting changes. The vote seems quite likely to be five to four. The more liberal members pressed both the narrow argument that an Alabama county was not a proper plaintiff because it inevitably would be covered and the broader argument that there was a sufficient record to justify the current formula. But the more conservative majority was plainly not persuaded by either point. It is unlikely that the Court will write an opinion forbidding a preclearance regime. But it may be difficult politically for Congress to enact a new measure. More analysis soon.

 Recommended Citation: Tom Goldstein, From the Shelby County argument, SCOTUSblog (Feb. 27, 2013, 10:55 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/02/from-the-shelby-county-argument/ ||||| Voting Procedures: A lawyer for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund talks about arguing in favor of the Voting Rights Act at the Supreme Court.

 WASHINGTON — A central provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 may be in peril, judging from tough questioning on Wednesday from the Supreme Court ’s more conservative members.

 If the court overturns the provision, nine states, mostly in the South, would become free to change voting procedures without first getting permission from federal officials.

 In a vivid argument in which the lawyers and justices drew varying lessons from the legacies of slavery, the Civil War and the civil rights movement, the court’s conservative wing suggested that the modern South had outgrown its troubled past and that the legal burdens on the nine states were no longer justified.

 Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. asked skeptically whether “the citizens in the South are more racist than citizens in the North.” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, whose vote is probably crucial, asked whether Alabama today is an “independent sovereign” or whether it must live “under the trusteeship of the United States government.”

 Justice Antonin Scalia said the law, once a civil rights landmark, now amounted to a “perpetuation of racial entitlement.”

 That remark created the sharpest exchange of the morning, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor on the other end. “Do you think that the right to vote is a racial entitlement?” she later asked a lawyer challenging the law, with an edge in her voice that left little doubt she was responding to Justice Scalia’s statement. “Do you think that racial discrimination in voting has ended, that there is none anywhere?”

 The outcome of the case will most likely remain in doubt until the end of the court’s current term, in June. Many legal observers predicted that the justices would overturn part of the voting law in 2009, when the court had the same conservative-leaning majority, only to be proven wrong.

 One important change, however, is that Chief Justice Roberts suggested in the 2009 ruling that Congress update its formula to determine which parts of the country should remain subject to the law. Congress has not done so.

 The question at the heart of Wednesday’s argument was whether Congress, in reauthorizing the provision for 25 years in 2006, was entitled to use a formula based on historic practices and voting data from elections held decades ago.

 Should the court strike down the law’s central provision, it would be easier for lawmakers in the nine states to enact the kind of laws Republicans in several states have recently advocated, including tighter identification standards. It would also give those states more flexibility to move polling places and redraw legislative districts.

 The four members of the court’s liberal wing, citing data and history, argued that Congress remained entitled to make the judgment that the provision was still needed in the covered jurisdictions. The law passed the Senate unanimously and House overwhelmingly, by a vote of 390 to 33 in 2006.

 “It’s an old disease,” Justice Stephen G. Breyer said of efforts to thwart minority voting. “It’s gotten a lot better. A lot better. But it’s still there.”

 Justice Kennedy said that history taught a different lesson, referring to the reconstruction of Europe after World War II. “The Marshall Plan was very good, too,” he said. “But times change.”

 Justice Breyer looked to a different conflict.

 “What do you think the Civil War was about?” he asked. “Of course it was aimed at treating some states differently than others.” He also said that the nation lived through 200 years of slavery and 80 years of racial segregation.

 Debo P. Adegbile, a lawyer with the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which joined the government in defending the law, echoed that point. “This statute is in part about our march through history to keep promises that our Constitution says for too long were unmet,” he said.

 The law was challenged by Shelby County, Ala., which said that its federal preclearance requirement, in Section 5 of the law, had outlived its usefulness and that it imposed an unwarranted badge of shame on the affected jurisdictions.

 The county’s lawyer, Bert W. Rein, said that “the problem to which the Voting Rights Act was addressed is solved.” |||||
What is a summary?

– If today's questions from the conservative wing of the Supreme Court are any guide, the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 is doomed. In fact, writes Tom Goldstein at SCOTUSblog, expect a 5-4 decision in favor of striking down Section 5 of the act, one of its core provisions. It requires nine mostly Southern states to get federal permission when they want to change voting rules, and Antonin Scalia and others suggested the measure is no longer necessary, reports the New York Times. Scalia called it a "perpetuation of racial entitlement," Anthony Kennedy wanted to know how long Alabama had to live "under the trusteeship of the United States government," and Chief Justice John Roberts wondered whether people in the South were more racist than those in the North. The court's liberal wing made the case that the act is still necessary, with Stephen Breyer saying the "old disease" of racism, along with the desire to keep minorities from voting, remains. If the court strikes down the act, it would likely require Congress to come up with a new formula for it, but both the Times and SCOTUSblog think it's unlikely that would be politically possible.


– Blade Runner vamp Sean Young was busted outside a post-Oscars party after she slapped a security guard when she was told to leave, according to officials. Now she's demanding an apology, reports TMZ. "She was trying to get into the party and couldn't," a Hollywood police commander tells AP. But the 52-year-old actress—who starred in Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, No Way Out, Wall Street, and most recently, Celebrity Rehab—says the guards were overzealous, and she wasn't doing anything wrong. "I was just standing by the little line," says Young, who earlier in the evening had posed for photos with Angelina Jolie, Michelle Williams, and Sandra Bullock. "I wasn't bothering anybody." She began to leave when ordered to by a guard, but he "grabbed my arm and started pulling me," says Young. "I was pulling my arm away—and I struck him." The Motion Picture Academy "needs to make a public apology on behalf of their security guard," Young tells People. She blames an Academy attorney, who she says urged one of the guards to place her under citizen's arrest. "I was well-behaved," she tells x17 Online. "It's atrocious behavior." She was booked on misdemeanor battery and released yesterday after she posted $20,000 bail. Watch Young tell TMZ what happened here.

Expand this summary.

Starting in 1996, Alexa Internet has been donating their crawl data to the Internet Archive. Flowing in every day, these data are added to the Wayback Machine after an embargo period. |||||

 Sean Young has been released from the Hollywood LAPD police station after being taken into custody for reportedly slapping a security guard outside the Academy Awards' Governors Ball last night.

 We caught the actress at her Santa Monica home early this morning and she told us all about the incident and showed us bruises she claims were sustained during an altercation with a guard.

 Young was outside the Oscars bash, taking photos with fellow celebs, when security guards asked the 52-year-old Blade Runner actress to leave the party because she didn't have a ticket, according to TMZ.

 That's when the actress allegedly struck the guard and was placed under citizen's arrest for misdemeanor battery.

 Young says the arrest is the fault of the Academy's lawyer.

 Click thru to see Young posing with Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt outside the party. ||||| Young, 52, who didn’t have a ticket to the party, told PEOPLE she was there to take pictures with party guests for her Facebook page.

 “They said, ‘No, you have to leave,’ ” said Young. “I started to leave and [the guard] grabbed my arm and he started pulling me. And I turned around and I was pulling my arm away – and I struck him.”

 Still, she maintains, it was the security guard who was in the wrong.

 “They need to make a public apology on behalf of their security guard,” Young told PEOPLE, also mentioning an attorney for the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences whom she said suggested the citizens’ arrest take place.

 And in an interview Monday with X17 Online, the actress says footage from the night will exonerate her.

 “I was well-behaved,” she said in the video interview. “It was fine … and the surveillance tape will bear that out. It’s atrocious behavior on the Academy’s part.”

 The Academy says in a statement, “There was an incident with Ms. Young outside the Academy s Governors Ball. It was not the Academy who pressed charges.” ||||| 6:30 AM PST --

 6:10 AM PST --

 1:45 AM PST --

 Now we know what allegedly happened. We're told Sean was standing near the entrance of the Governors Ball, taking pictures with friends when security guards realized she didn't have a ticket so they asked her to leave. We're told Sean left but came back shortly thereafter, and when security asked her to leave again, a guard may have placed his hand on her arm when Sean allegedly slapped him. She was then placed under citizen's arrest for battery.We just got video of Sean leaving the LAPD Hollywood substation, where she blamed her arrest on the Academy's lawyer.We just spotted Sean Young leaving the police station. She claims she was waiting with friends to enter the Governors Ball when an Oscar official suggested security make a citizen's arrest. She did not say why the official made that suggestion ... or mention any physical encounter with the security guard.----------------------------------------------------And the handcuffs go to ...-- who was busted by police at the officialafter party for allegedly getting physical with a security guard ... TMZ has learned.Sources tell us ... Young was attending the-- the annual schmancy Oscar party thrown by the Academy itself -- when she allegedly got into a dispute with a security guard and made contact.We're told the "Ace Ventura: Pet Detective" star was placed under citizen's arrest by security -- until LAPD arrived to take her into custody. Young was booked for misdemeanor battery.In the hours before her arrest, Young was taking pictures with some of the biggest stars in the world ... including Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt and Sandra Bullock. ||||| Starting in 1996, Alexa Internet has been donating their crawl data to the Internet Archive. Flowing in every day, these data are added to the Wayback Machine after an embargo period. |||||


Article:
SHEFFIELD, Mass. (AP) — A memorial in a remote corner of Massachusetts that marks a 1969 UFO sighting has been ordered moved, but one man who experienced a close encounter is objecting.

 The 5,000-pound (2,300-kilogram) memorial in Sheffield was installed in 2015, but was moved about 30 feet (9 meters) a few weeks later when it was discovered it was on town land.

 Now, Town Administrator Rhonda LaBombard tells The Berkshire Eagle it has to be moved again because it's on a town right-of-way easement.

 That's not sitting well with Thom Reed. He was 9 when he, his mother, grandmother and brother saw what he described as a "self-contained glow" that flooded their car with an amber light. About 40 people in several surrounding towns reported the strange light.

 Reed is threatening legal action. ||||| Sheffield orders new landing spot for UFO monument

 BEN GARVER - THE BERKSHIRE EAGLE EAGLE FILE

 Posted Tuesday, April 10, 2018 12:45 pm

 SHEFFIELD — A memorial marking the location of a 1969 close encounter, known as "our nation's first off-world/UFO incident," is going to be moved.

 Again.

 During a recently conducted land survey, the town found that the memorial, as well as a bench and lighting decorating the area, is still on a town right-of-way easement and must be removed by the owner or the town will do so in May, according to Town Administrator Rhonda LaBombard.

 The memorial was purchased with donations from community members and some of the 40 people who witnessed the unidentified flying object.

 "It's kind of on town property and no one decided it could go there," LaBombard said. "The town has bylaws and if we let one place put something up then why can't someone else? I don't want that to happen."

 The 5,000 pound concrete structure was installed in 2015, and moved a few weeks later after officials discovered it had been placed on town property. Some people said the marker detracted from the beauty of the historical replica of the 180-year-old bridge that went up in flames in 1994. The marker was moved 30 feet to Pine Island Farm, which abuts the Old Covered Bridge. In 2017, two benches and light fixtures were added to the area, though one bench is no longer there.

 The Select Board gave LaBombard permission in January to send a copy of the land survey to the owner(s) of the memorial and a notice that the items will be moved by the town if they are not picked up prior to May. It's not clear who actually owns the monument.

 News that Sheffield is planning to remove the memorial was a surprise to Louis Aragi, the farmer who believes the memorial is on his land, and Thom Reed, one of the four people who had a close encounter near the bridge on Sept. 1, 1969.

 "This isn't fair to the community," said Reed, who grew up in the area but now lives in Kentucky. "It's not right having nothing there."

 Reed, who has been the most vocal about what happened that night, said he is confused as to why the memorial's position is an issue because he worked with town officials to find the memorial's current placement.

 "She chose the spot herself," he said of LaBombard.

 Reed said UFO enthusiasts, including those who funded the memorial, bench and lighting, may take legal action to prevent the memorial's removal.

 "This has come up more than once," Reed said. "We're not done with the monument."

 The monument, which sits at the end of the covered bridge, is a 6-foot tall, white, concrete block bearing a plaque from Gov. Charlie Baker's office embedded on one side and the Massachusetts seal on the other. The plaque reads, in part, "This Governor's Citation [is] in recognition of the off-world incident on Sept. 1st, 1969, which engaged the Reed Family, which has been established."

 The memorial is flanked by a bench donated by Reed and the International UFO Museum Research Center in Roswell, N.M., as well as two black light posts. Roswell is renowned as the site of an alleged 1947 UFO crash.

 Reed was 9 on that September night in 1969 when he and others say they had their close encounter.

 He was riding in a station wagon with family — his mother, grandmother and brother — crossing the covered bridge on their way home when Reed said his grandmother looked back to see a "self-contained glow" behind them that seemed to move through the trees. Once the car was in a clearing, Reed said, it was flooded in light with an amber glow on both sides of the dirt road.

 The car came to a stop and everything seemed "really calm," Reed said, and there was a shift in the barometric pressure. The dead silence was broken by a chorus of loud crickets and frogs.

 After that, Reed isn't sure what happened. He has brief memories of being in something like a hangar with other people. The next thing he knew, Reed was back in the station wagon, but his mother and grandmother had switched spots and more than two hours had gone by.

 The event was reported on by WSBS radio as people called in with their accounts of witnessing strange lights that night. In all 40 people came forward, including residents of Sheffield, Great Barrington, Stockbridge and South Egremont.

 The Great Barrington Historical Society in 2015 deemed the account an "off-world incident ... historically significant and true," and voted to admit it into its archives. That decision has been viewed by some as the first officially recognized off-world case.

 The 1969 sighting has been the subject of many television shows — "Discovery Channel's Alien Mysteries," "Travel Channels Paranormal Paparazzi," "Our New England Legends" — and six documentaries/films.

 Kristin Palpini can be reached at kpalpini@berkshireeagle.com, @kristinpalpini on Twitter, and 413-629-4621.

 TALK TO US

 If you'd like to leave a comment (or a tip or a question) about this story with the editors, please email us. We also welcome letters to the editor for publication; you can do that by filling out our letters form and submitting it to the newsroom. |||||Summary:

– A memorial in a remote corner of Massachusetts that marks a 1969 UFO sighting has been ordered moved, but one man who experienced a close encounter is objecting, the AP reports. The 5,000-pound memorial in Sheffield was installed in 2015, but was moved about 30 feet a few weeks later when it was discovered it was on town land. Now, Town Administrator Rhonda LaBombard tells the Berkshire Eagle it has to be moved again because it's on a town right-of-way easement. That's not sitting well with Thom Reed. "This isn't fair to the community," says Reed. "It's not right having nothing there." Reed is also perplexed because he and town officials joined forces to give the memorial its current position. "She chose the spot herself," he says about LaBombard. Now Reed is threatening legal action. "This has come up more than once," he says. "We're not done with the monument." He was 9 when he, his mother, grandmother, and brother saw what he described as a "self-contained glow" that flooded their car with an amber light. About 40 people in several surrounding towns reported the strange light.


Summarize this article:

2467223

 Growing up under “Tiger Mother” can be rewarding. Sophia Chua-Rubenfeld, the eldest daughter of “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother” author Amy Chua, recently gave the commencement address at her high school graduation.

 Confirmed by someone in the audience, Chua-Rubenfeld was valedictorian and made several jokes during the speech, poking gentle fun at her mom, who has been the subject of immense criticism and praise this year for her parenting methods.

 A source told The Daily Caller that Chua-Rubenfeld opened the address with a joke about her mom’s New York Times bestselling memoir.

 “Instead of writing her own speech, she [told audience members] that she was going to read from her [favorite] book…’Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother,'” the source told TheDC of Chua-Rubenfeld’s address.

 According to the source, Chua-Rubenfeld’s school only chose one valedictorian for the class of 2010-2011, and students determined who had earned that title.

 “The only other student speaker was the class president who spoke as salutatorian,” says the source.

 (TheDC Interview: ‘Tiger Mother’ Amy Chua speaks out, wins teaching award)

 Earlier this year, Chua-Rubenfeld started a personal blog to chronicle her daily life and “set the record straight” on rumors about her family. The teenager, who applied to Harvard, Yale, and the University of Virginia, hinted in an April blog entry that she’d decided on Harvard.

 During a Q&A post about the university she’d picked, Chua-Rubenfeld wrote, “Somewhere wicked awesome,” using a popular word among Massachusetts residents.

 Earlier this year, Chua made Time magazine’s 2011 list of the world’s most influential people and brought her husband and girls to the gala. Chua, a Yale law professor, came under fire after the January release of her book, which was intended to be a satirical take on rigid Asian parenting. In January, an excerpt of Chua’s memoir appeared in the Wall Street Journal and readers almost immediately went after the academic scholar with pitchforks for promoting strict child-rearing techniques.

 In the piece, Chua said her daughters were forbidden from having sleepovers, participating in play dates, and earning anything less than an “A.” Chua later explained to TheDC that she’d intended for her book to read like a self-deprecating David Sedaris memoir rather than a parenting guide as some assumed.

 Follow Laura on Twitter ||||| Not your computer? Use Guest mode to sign in privately. Learn more |||||

– Maybe the final, happy note in the Tiger Mom brouhaha? Amy Chua's daughter was valedictorian of her high school class, reports the Daily Caller. Sophia Chua-Rubenfeld even poked a little fun at the controversy over mom's Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother book, joking that she was going to read from it rather than give her own speech. If you missed the fury in January, critics read the book as an indictment of America's lax parenting and as a push for an über-strict alternative. Author Chua said they took what was meant to be a humorous, self-deprecating book way too seriously. Either way, things have worked out nicely for Sophia, who is apparently on her way to Harvard. Her blog is here.


News article:

Michelle Williams Still Struggling With the Meaning of Heath Ledger's Death

 Email This In

 Which isn't to say the empty void left behind has been filled; when asked in her

 "I've found meanings around the circumstance but the actual event doesn't have it, I can't find it," Williams says. "I can't find a meaning for it."

 In an otherwise upbeat interview about her blossoming success from 'Blue Valentine' and working with

 "I can kind of got obsessed with that for a while. A lot of things died," Williams said. "There's a line from a book that gave me so much comfort and it says when you've truly lost everything, then at least you can become rich in loss." See the interview after the jump. In Michelle Williams ' first network interview since fiance Heath Ledger died in 2007, the actress looks healed and happier than in years before.Which isn't to say the empty void left behind has been filled; when asked in her ABC interview if the meaning of Heath Ledger's has settled in over the years, Williams can't put it into many words."I've found meanings around the circumstance but the actual event doesn't have it, I can't find it," Williams says. "I can't find a meaning for it."In an otherwise upbeat interview about her blossoming success from 'Blue Valentine' and working with Ryan Gosling , Williams notes that one of the things she struggled with for the longest time was dealing with the fact that life can easily change in an instant."I can kind of got obsessed with that for a while. A lot of things died," Williams said. "There's a line from a book that gave me so much comfort and it says when you've truly lost everything, then at least you can become rich in loss."

 It was surreal for Williams when Heath's death didn't seem true, and she misses that feeling."In a strange way, I miss that year, because all those possibilities that existed then are gone," she says. "It didn't seem unlikely to me that he could walk through a door or could appear behind a bush. It was a year of very magical thinking, and in some ways I'm sad to be moving further and further away from it."Later in the interview, Gosling joins the group to talk about the pleasure of working with Williams."She's like a sexy cowboy," Gosling says.On whether or not they are dating, that's still not true -- yet."Creatively. We are 'doing it' creatively," Gosling said. "No, we're professionals. I always look like I'm lying. That's just my face." ||||| Starting in 1996, Alexa Internet has been donating their crawl data to the Internet Archive. Flowing in every day, these data are added to the Wayback Machine after an embargo period. |||||
What is a shorter version of the above article?

– Michelle Williams is moving on from Heath Ledger's death—and it makes her a little sad. Promoting her latest film Blue Valentine on Nightline, Williams recalled the first year without him: “In a strange way, I miss that year, because all those possibilities that existed then are gone. It didn't seem unlikely to me that he could walk through a door or could appear behind a bush. It was a year of very magical thinking, and in some ways I'm sad to be moving further and further away from it.” "I've found meanings around the circumstance but the actual event doesn't have it, I can't find it," she says of his death. "I can't find a meaning for it." Click for more from the interview and to watch the video.


Article:

Sales of Geiger counters and potassium iodide supplements that can block some radiation have surged nationwide since Friday, fueled by concerns among some Americans that radiation released from Japanese nuclear plants could spread to the United States.But as retailers scramble to restock, experts say the chances that North America will be harmed by radiation from Japanese nuclear reactors damaged in last week's earthquake and tsunami are negligible at best."I think it's exceedingly improbable — I'd say impossible — that this accident would deliver any detectable amount of radiation at ground level in the United States," said Elmer Lewis, a nuclear expert and professor emeritus of mechanical engineering at Northwestern University. "It would be barely detectable and have absolutely no health consequences."The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said Sunday that the country is "not expected to experience any harmful levels of radioactivity."Despite those statements, potassium iodide supplements — which can protect the thyroid gland if taken before or shortly after a person is exposed to radiation but do not protect other body parts or prevent damage from other radioactive substances — are either sold out or selling quickly at several Chicago-area stores."I've had probably upwards of 100 calls in the last few days concerning this product," said Brennan Cox, an assistant manager at The Vitamin Shoppe in Lincoln Park. He said the store's handful of 2-ounce bottles were gone by Saturday.True Nature Foods in Chicago's Edgewater neighborhood also was sold out of potassium iodide Tuesday. That store and Kramers Health Foods in the Loop, which still had some potassium iodide in stock, have been unable to place new orders, employees at both stores said.Deerfield-based Walgreen Co. reported that its stores on the West Coast have been receiving inquiries about potassium iodide, but the company does not stock the product, spokesman Jim Cohn said.Meanwhile, companies that sell Geiger counters have been overwhelmed with orders."The phone has been ringing off the hook," said Raphael Karunditu, president of California-based Gamma-Scout. "We have hundreds upon hundreds of orders, and our partner in Germany is talking about thousands of orders at his site." ||||| Japan's nuclear crisis is spiking demand in the U.S. and a few other places for a cheap drug that can protect against one type of radiation damage _ even though the risk is only in Japan.

 This Tuesday, March 15, 2011 photo shows bottles of potassium iodide on the shelf of the Texas Star Pharmacy on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 in Plano, Texas. The pharmacy has been receiving an unusually high... (Associated Press)

 This Tuesday, March 15, 2011 photo shows a bottle of potassium iodide at the Texas Star Pharmacy on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 in Plano, Texas. The pharmacy has been receiving an unusually high number of... (Associated Press)

 Pharmacist Donna Barsky measures potassium iodide for a prescription at the Texas Star Pharmacy on Monday, March 15, 2011 in Plano, Texas. The pharmacy has been receiving an unusually high number of... (Associated Press)

 Pharmacist Donna Barsky measures potassium iodide for a prescription at the Texas Star Pharmacy on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 in Plano, Texas. The pharmacy has been receiving an unusually high number of... (Associated Press)

 Health agencies in California and western Canada warned Tuesday that there's no reason for people an ocean away to suddenly stock up on potassium iodide. Some key suppliers say they're back-ordered and are getting panicked calls from potential customers.

 "Tell them, `Stop, don't do it,'" said Kathryn Higley, director of radiation health physics at Oregon State University.

 "There's a lot of mythology about the use of potassium iodide," added Dr. Irwin Redlener, a pediatrician and disaster preparedness specialist at Columbia University. "It's not a radiation antidote in general."

 The pill can help prevent radioactive iodine from causing thyroid cancer, for which children are most at risk in a nuclear disaster.

 Japan's Nuclear Safety Agency has stored potassium iodide to distribute in case of high radiation exposure, and the U.S. Navy is giving it to military crews exposed to radiation as they help with relief efforts in Japan. But government and independent experts say that Americans have little to fear from any radiation released by the damaged Japanese nuclear plant.

 "You just aren't going to have any radiological material that, by the time it traveled those large distances, could present any risk to the American public," said Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Greg Jazcko.

 Other governments echoed that warning.

 "We do not expect any health risk following the nuclear reactor releases in Japan, nor is the consumption of potassium iodide tablets a necessary precaution," British Columbia's health ministry told the public Tuesday.

 In Russia, where memory of the very different Chernobyl disaster 25 years ago is strong, media reports said pharmacies in Vladivostok, a major port just west of Japan, had run out of the pills.

 "The mass media tells us that the wind is blowing the other way, that radiation poses no threat. But people are a mess," Valentina Chupina, a nanny in Vladivostok, said in a comment posted on the website of the newspaper Delovoi Peterburg. She said people don't believe the government will warn them if something goes wrong so potassium iodide is being bought up in the pharmacies.

 In the U.S., whether people fear fallout from Japan or a nuclear accident here, potassium iodide seems to have become something of a hot commodity.

 "I feel strongly there is a high likelihood we will have radiation coming from Japan," said Tammy Lahutsky as she waited at the Texas Star Pharmacy in Plano, Texas on Tuesday. There's not, but she bought six bottles for herself and a friend, anyway.

 "I can't tell you how many women are calling up in tears," said Alan Morris, president of Anbex Inc., a leading supplier. His order line ringing in the background, Morris said the company had sold out of more than 10,000 14-pill packages and doesn't expect more supply until April.

 Internet seller NukePills.com donated 50,000 potassium iodide tablets to a physician-run disaster-relief team in Japan, pills not suitable for U.S. retail sale because of packaging issues and expiration dates. Regardless, "these pills really needed to go where people were in the most dire need," said company president Troy Jones. Meanwhile, he said he's taken over 6,000 orders since Friday and is selling a liquid version until more pills become available.

 What does this drug do?

 Potassium iodide, a salt also known as KI, has just one use: It shields the thyroid from radioactive iodine. It blocks no other type of radiation, and protects no other body part.

 The drug, either pill or liquid form, is sold over-the-counter and is considered safe, although some people may experience allergic reactions.

 Potassium iodide is most important for children and pregnant women, because a growing thyroid is much more active and more likely to absorb radioactive iodine, said Columbia's Redlener. It should be given within a few hours of radiation exposure _ but isn't considered that useful for people over age 40.

 At the same time, the crisis renews a question that the U.S. government has debated for years: Should people keep small supplies of potassium iodide on hand in case of a local radiation emergency?

 The federal government already stockpiles the drug, and offers enough for states also to keep on hand to treat every resident within 10 miles of a nuclear reactor. About 22 states have requested or received some of those doses, and localities periodically offer free supplies for nearby residents to store themselves.

 But radiation health specialists debate whether a 10-mile radius is big enough _ and whether people should store their own. Some are pushing the Obama administration to reconsider. Obama health officials wouldn't comment Tuesday.

 "My feeling is I would have every household within of a plant have it in their medicine cabinet," said Redlener, adding that the Japan crisis illustrates the difficulty of getting pills from a central warehouse to panicked people during an emergency.

 Even on the East Coast, some health departments reported increased interest from power-plant neighbors Tuesday: A Pennsylvania hotline that normally gets five to 10 calls a week about storing the pills has fielded 85 such inquiries in the past two days. |||||
What is a summary?

– An ocean away from the unfolding nuclear crisis in Japan, worried Americans are stocking up on Geiger counters and supplements that can block one effect of radiation exposure. Pharmacies around the country are rapidly running out of potassium iodide, which can protect the thyroid gland from radiation damage, the AP reports. Suppliers say they are receiving calls from panicked customers, but experts say Americans shouldn't worry about being exposed to radiation from Japan, and shouldn't bother buying potassium iodide unless they live near a nuclear plant. "I think it's exceedingly improbable—I'd say impossible—that this accident would deliver any detectable amount of radiation at ground level in the United States," a nuclear expert tells the Los Angeles Times. "It would be barely detectable and have absolutely no health consequences."


Tweet with a location

 You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more ||||| Chely Wright has married girlfriend Lauren Blitzer just a little over a year after the country music star came out about being a lesbian and revealed just how painful that confession was in the world of country music.

 Wright, who has posted wedding photos on Twitter of herself and Blitzer in white gowns, announced to the world in May 2010 that she was a lesbian.

 "Country music would rather an artist be a drunk -- they even encourage and endorse that one," Wright said in an interview with the Los Angeles Times' Geoff Boucher shortly after she came out.

 "You get good money from Jim Beam to put that emblem on the side of your bus. I was on the Crown Royal tour, and I have to say it was one of my favorite tours. They would rather you were a drug addict than be gay. They will forgive you if you beat your wife, lose your kids to state, get six divorces, make a sex tape, get labeled as a tramp — any and all of it is better than being gay."

 After the honeymoon, Wright will see how the latest turn in her personal life has affected her career.

 In an interview earlier this year with the blog Autostraddle, Wright said coming out "didn't help my career."

 A January article in the Tennessean said that Wright’s sales were down about two-thirds from her last studio album and noted that she had shifted her focus from country music to Americana.

 But Saturday was a day of celebration for the 40-year-old singer and Blitzer, 30, an LGBT activist. The couple married at the home of Blitzer’s aunt in Connecticut.

 On Sunday, Wright's Twitter account was filled with congratulations from fans:

 "Congratulations on your big day tomorrow! Wishing you a long and joyful life together. (@MaddiesCorner)”

 "congrats lady!!!! Wishing you and your love so much happiness! (from @AudraEqualityMc)”

 A comment she made last year is fitting given this weekend's celebration: "I feel like I'm floating," Wright said after coming out. "It's like my friends who are in the know, which are not many, and my family members who know, which isn't all of them, are lifting me up to get through this."

 ALSO:

 Chely Wright's 'Lifted Off the Ground'

 Chely Wright finds strength to face the music

 Chely Wright is engaged to girlfriend Lauren Blitzer

 -- Amy Hubbard

 Photo: Chely Wright. Credit: Kirk McKoy / Los Angeles Times |||||

Write a summary.

– She probably didn't make $17.9 million doing it, but country crooner Chely Wright has gotten married to girlfriend Lauren Blitzer a year after coming out on the cover of People magazine. The pair wed yesterday in Connecticut, and Wright's Twitter account was abuzz with photos of the two women in their dresses and congratulations from fans. Wright has said that admitting she was gay "didn't help my career," and the LA Times notes that sales of her most recent album had dropped by two-thirds over its predecessor.


– The nation's debate on sanctuary cities and states is about to play out front and center in a federal courtroom. The Justice Department is suing the state of California over three new laws that provide protection to undocumented immigrants, reports NPR. Attorney General Jeff Sessions will be in the state Wednesday to lay out his case that California is hindering the federal government's ability to enforce immigration laws, reports the Los Angeles Times. The laws, all passed last year, deal with how businesses and law enforcement agencies in the state cooperate with federal immigration officials. For example, one makes it illegal for private employers to help agents track down undocumented workers unless they're bound to do so by a court order. "The Department of Justice and the Trump administration are going to fight these unjust, unfair, and unconstitutional policies that are imposed on you," Sessions will say in a speech to the California Peace Officers Association. California Gov. Jerry Brown was already tweeting in response, with a not-so-subtle dig at President Trump's tweeting style. “At a time of unprecedented political turmoil, Jeff Sessions has come to California to further divide and polarize America," he wrote. "Jeff, these political stunts may be the norm in Washington, but they don’t work here. SAD!!!” The case is not only a big escalation of the fight between the feds and California, it could have big consequences across the country in other states and cities with similar laws, notes the Washington Post.

Expand this summary.

Justice Department Sues California Over Impeding Immigration Enforcement

 Enlarge this image toggle caption Charles Reed/AP Charles Reed/AP

 Updated at 9:20 p.m. ET

 The Justice Department is suing California and two top state officials, accusing them of interfering with federal immigration efforts by passing and enforcing state laws that hinder U.S. operations against undocumented people.

 The lawsuit filed late Tuesday in federal court in Sacramento, Calif., points out that the Constitution gives the U.S. government sweeping authority over immigration.

 Justice Department lawyers argue that California is blocking enforcement efforts by the Department of Homeland Security and imposing other, impermissible obligations on the federal government. Federal authorities said that evades common sense and has the potential to endanger communities in California and beyond.

 The new federal case represents an escalation of the long-running battle between the Trump administration and California, whose Democratic governor, Jerry Brown, and attorney general, Xavier Becerra, have positioned themselves as ideological opponents to the White House on matters from immigration and climate change to criminal justice.

 Echoing the tone and favored language of President Trump on Twitter, Gov. Brown issued a statement Tuesday night that called the federal lawsuit "SAD!!!" and a political stunt.

 Last year, California lawmakers passed three immigration-related laws that feature prominently in the new lawsuit. One bars private employers from voluntarily cooperating with federal immigration officials and requires businesses to notify workers in advance of a federal raid.

 A second law restricts state and local law enforcement from voluntarily sharing information with the feds about the release dates of undocumented people in their custody. That law also bars the transfer of undocumented people into federal custody. The third law under federal challenge covers state inspections of detention facilities that hold noncitizens in federal custody.

 The Justice Department is asking for a preliminary injunction to block those three laws. To advance their cause, federal lawyers cite a 2012 Supreme Court dispute, in which the Obama administration sued Arizona over its punitive law meant to crack down on immigrants there.

 A divided Supreme Court eventually ruled parts of the state law were "pre-empted" under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. In essence, the court's five-justice majority said that federal law trumps state law in the immigration area, lest each state develop its own policy toward immigrants.

 Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a longtime proponent of immigration restrictions, will speak Wednesday at an annual Law Enforcement Legislative Day hosted by the California Peace Officers' Association in Sacramento.

 "The Department of Justice and the Trump administration are going to fight these unjust, unfair and unconstitutional policies that have been imposed on you," Sessions will tell that group, according to an advance excerpt of his remarks. "We are fighting to make your jobs safer and to help you reduce crime in America."

 Becerra, a former Democratic representative, will speak to the same group later Wednesday.

 In his statement, the state's governor took on Sessions. "At a time of unprecedented political turmoil, Jeff Sessions has come to California to further divide and polarize America," Brown said. "Jeff, these political stunts may be the norm in Washington, but they don't work here. SAD!!!"

 In D.C., senior Justice Department officials said California had acted in "quite obviously novel ways" and that the state laws there were "glaring and in some respects go beyond what we've seen" elsewhere. Those officials said the Justice Department is in the process of reviewing other state immigration laws.

 The U.S. Justice Department is also locked in courtroom battles with California and other jurisdictions over its threats to withhold federal law enforcement grant money from sanctuary cities, which refuse to voluntarily share information with immigration agents. ||||| Tweet with a location

 You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more ||||| The case will test the power of the Trump administration to force California police departments and local governments to cooperate with deportations and other aggressive enforcement actions targeting people who entered the country illegally or overstayed their visas. It reflects the administration’s limited tolerance for state’s rights when states want to go in a sharply different direction than the administration. |||||