women

CHERYL Tweedy and Jade Thirlwall looked sensational at the Harper’s Bazaar Women of the Year Awards this week.

The iconic singers, 42 and 32, arrived at the glamorous event last night alongside an A-list lineup of women.

Girls Aloud icon Cheryl stole the spotlight in a chic black satin dress with a boxy neckline.

It flowed effortlessly to the floor, covering her shoes, and featured lace detailing on the chest.

She finished the look by simply tying her hair up out of her face and accessorised with a pair of small silver studs and a glossy natural pink lip.

The star posed for a series of snaps next to Little Mix‘s Jade in the “winner’s room”, as Jade smiled ear to ear holding up a glass trophy for the “Musician Award”.

BRAVE CHERYL

Cheryl puts on brave face ahead of Liam Payne’s anniversary as she meets pal

REUNITED

Cheryl Cole shares touching tribute to band member after she bags huge new gig

She wore an asymmetrical off the shoulder red dress with an embossed pattern and a draping on the right-hand side.

It fell to the floor in its formal beauty, hugging her waist and hips.

Jade finished off her outfit with dramatic winged eyeliner and a bold brown lip combo.

Her hair flowed down her back in natural loose waves.

Also in attendance on the night was England footballer Chloe Kelly, who wowed in a sheer chain-mail hooded gown.

The unique ensemble featured cut-outs at the side of the bust as well as silver floral detailing that scattered down the right-hand side of her body.

The sporty star enjoyed the night in a pair of silver heeled sandals, comfier on her feet than a higher heeled counterpart.

Melanie C, aka Sporty Spice, posed alongside Chloe in the winners room after she took home the award for Sportswoman of The Year.

In a sweet snap together the duo are throwing up peace signs as Chloe holds the award in her free hand.

Melanie’s smiling in an off the shoulder black dress featuring red piping and a floor-length ruffle detail.

Her red nail polish peeks out of her open-toed shoes, matching the piping to perfection.

Everyone appeared to be having an amazing night.

Cheryl made her first red carpet appearance since the funeral of her former flame, Liam Payne, just last month.

The Girls Aloud legend has since been gradually returning to the spotlight, teasing new TV appearances and brand collaborations on her social media.

Meanwhile Jade has been incredibly active promoting new music and working on her career.

back soon

The Traitors’ return date revealed as Celeb version ends & it’s not a long wait

CHEERS

27 free festive experiences across the UK from light trails to Santa’s grotto

Earlier this year she took home a BRIT Award for Best Pop Act.

She also received the Trailblazer Award at the Rolling Stone UK 2024 awards.

WASHINGTON — Ahead of Tuesday’s election, when Americans weighed in at the ballot box for the first time since President Trump returned to office, a vicious fight emerged among the president’s most prominent supporters.

The head of the most influential conservative think tank in Washington found himself embroiled in controversy over his defense of Nick Fuentes, an avowed racist and antisemite, whose rising profile and embrace on the right has become a phenomenon few in politics can ignore.

Fierce acrimony between Fuentes’ critics and acolytes dominated social media for days as a historically protracted government shutdown risked food security for millions of Americans. Despite the optics, Trump hosted a Halloween ball at his Mar-a-Lago estate themed around the extravagance of the Great Gatsby era.

Marjorie Taylor Greene, a congresswoman who rose to national fame for her promotion of conspiracy theories, took to legacy media outlets to warn that Republicans are failing the American people over fundamental political imperatives, calling on leadership to address the nation’s cost-of-living crisis and come up with a comprehensive healthcare plan.

And on Tuesday, as vote tallies came in, moderate Democratic candidates in New Jersey and Virginia who had campaigned on economic bread-and-butter issues outperformed their polling — and Kamala Harris’ 2024 numbers against Trump in a majority of districts throughout their states.

The past year in politics has been dominated by a crisis within the Democratic Party over how to rebuild a winning coalition after Trump’s reelection. Now, just one year on, the Republican Party appears to be fracturing, as well, as it prepares for Trump’s departure from the national stage and the vacuum it will create in a party cast over 10 years in his image.

“Lame duck status is going to come even faster now,” Erick Erickson, a prominent conservative commentator, wrote on social media as election results trickled in. “Trump cannot turn out the vote unless he is on the ballot, and that is never happening again.”

A post-Trump debate intensifies

Flying to Seoul last week on a tour of Asia, Trump was asked to respond to remarks from top congressional Republicans, including the House speaker and Senate majority leader, over his potential pursuit of a third term in office, despite a clear constitutional prohibition against it.

“I guess I’m not allowed to run,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One. “If you read it, it’s pretty clear, I’m not allowed to run. It’s too bad.”

Less than a year remains until the 2026 midterm elections when Democrats could take back partial control of Congress, crippling Trump’s ability to enact his agenda and encumbering his administration with investigations.

But a countdown to the midterms also means that Trump has precious time left before the 2028 presidential election begins in earnest, eclipsing the final two years of his presidency.

It’s a conversation already brewing on the right.

“The Republican Party is just a husk,” Stephen K. Bannon, a prominent conservative commentator who served as White House chief strategist in Trump’s first term, told Politico in an interview Wednesday. Bannon has advocated for Trump to challenge the constitutional rule on presidential term limits.

“When Trump is engaged, when Trump’s on the ballot, when Trump’s team can get out there and get low-propensity voters — because that’s the difference now in modern politics — when they can do it, they win,” Bannon said. “When he doesn’t do it, they don’t.”

Trump has already suggested his vice president, JD Vance, and secretary of State, Marco Rubio, will be top contenders to succeed him. But an extreme faction of his political coalition, aligned with Fuentes, is already disparaging them as globalists working at the whims of a baseless conspiracy of American Jews. Fuentes targeted Vance last week, in particular, over his weight, his marriage to a “brown” Indian woman, and his support for Israel.

“The infighting is stupid,” Vance said on Wednesday in a post on the election results, tying intraparty battles to Tuesday’s poor showing for the GOP.

“I care about my fellow citizens — particularly young Americans — being able to afford a decent life, I care about immigration and our sovereignty, and I care about establishing peace overseas so our resources can be focused at home,” he said, adding: “If you care about those things too, let’s work together.”

Democratic fractures remain

Some in Republican leadership saw a silver lining in an otherwise difficult night on Tuesday.

The success of Zohran Mamdani, a 34-year-old democratic socialist who will serve as the youngest and first Muslim mayor of New York City, “is the reason I’m optimistic” for next year’s midterms, House Speaker Mike Johnson told RealClearPolitics on Wednesday.

New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani speaks at Tuesday night’s victory celebration.

(Yuki Iwamura / Associated Press)

“We will have a great example to point to in New York City,” Johnson said. “They’ve handed the keys to the kingdom to the Marxist. He will destroy it.”

Mamdani’s victory is a test for a weak and diffuse Democratic leadership still trying to steer the party in a unified direction, despite this week’s elections displaying just how big a tent Democratic voters have become.

Republicans like Trump know that labeling conventional Democratic politicians as socialists and communists is a political ploy. But Mamdani himself, they point out, describes his views as socialist, a toxic national brand that could hobble Democratic candidates across the country if Republicans succeed in casting New York’s mayor-elect as the Democrats’ future.

“After last night’s results, the decision facing all Americans could not be more clear — we have a choice between communism and common sense,” Trump said at a White House event on Wednesday. “As long as I’m in the White House, the United States is not going communist in any way, shape or form.”

In an interview with CNN shortly after Mamdani’s victory was called, Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader hoping to lead the party back into the majority next year, refused repeated questioning on whether Mamdani’s win might hurt Democratic prospects nationwide.

“This is the best they can come up with?” he said, adding: “We are going to win control of the House of Representatives.”

Bannon, too, warned that establishment Republicans could be mistaken in dismissing Mamdani’s populist appeal across party lines to Trump’s base of supporters. Mamdani, he noted, succeeded in driving out low-propensity voters in record numbers — a key to Trump’s success.

Tuesday’s election, he told Politico, “should be a wake-up call to the populist nationalist movement under President Trump that these are very serious people.”

“There should be even more than alarm bells,” he added. “There should be flashing red lights all over.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Will these six California GOP House members survive new districts?
The deep dive: Shakedown in Beverly Hills: High-stakes poker, arson and an alleged Israeli mobster
The L.A. Times Special: Toting a tambourine, she built L.A.’s first megachurch. Then she suddenly disappeared

More to come,
Michael Wilner
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Imagine walking for days and nights to escape gunfire. You carry your child in your arms, guiding them through the darkness to avoid drone attacks. You have no food, no water, and nowhere safe to go.

This is the reality for families in Darfur and across Sudan, where civilians are being trapped, targeted, and terrorised as the country’s brutal war enters its third year. In el-Fasher and other parts of Darfur, entire communities have been besieged. Those who try to flee are attacked; those who remain face starvation, violence, and disease.

Behind these headlines are women and children who are suffering the most. Sexual violence is being used systematically to punish, to terrorise, and to destroy. Women and girls are abducted, forced to work for armed groups during the day, and then assaulted at night, often in front of others. Many survivors are children themselves. Some of the girls who have become pregnant through rape are so young and malnourished that they are unable to feed their babies.

Perpetrators no longer attempt to hide their crimes. Violence has become so widespread that recording or documenting cases can cost you your life. In Tawila, North Darfur, only one clinic run by Doctors Without Borders can provide care for rape survivors.

Boys are also being drawn into the conflict. Over the past 10 days, three trucks filled with children were reported heading towards Nyala, while in South Darfur, children are being armed and sent to fight. Families are disappearing without a trace.

Aid workers are also targeted. They are being kidnapped for ransom, assaulted, sometimes killed, and targeted because armed groups believe humanitarian organisations can pay. Many of those delivering aid are Sudanese women who risk their lives every day to bring food, water, and protection services to others.

Violence has also taken on an ethnic dimension. One displaced person told us, “I cannot go back, they will know by my skin colour which tribe I am from, and they will kill me.”

Sudan is now the world’s largest displacement crisis and one of its most severe humanitarian emergencies. More than 30 million people need urgent assistance. Fifteen million have been forced from their homes. Hunger and cholera are spreading fast. Clinics have been destroyed, schools are closed, and 13 million children are out of school, their education and futures slipping away.

Yet even amid this devastation, Sudanese women’s organisations are leading the response. They are running safe spaces, supporting survivors of violence, and keeping children learning where they can. They know their communities and continue their work despite constant danger. Their courage deserves not only recognition but also support.

The humanitarian response, however, remains catastrophically underfunded. Only about a quarter of what is needed has been received. Without immediate resources, millions will be left without food, medical care, or shelter as famine looms. Funding protection and psychosocial support for women and children is not optional. It is life-saving.

And this is not only a crisis of violence but also a crisis of indifference. Each day the world looks away, more lives are lost and more futures erased. The international community must support investigations into war crimes, including sexual violence, ethnic killings, and attacks on aid workers. Silence is not neutrality. Silence gives a blank cheque for horror to continue.

We must act now, urgently. Governments and donors must fully fund the humanitarian response and ensure access for those delivering aid. They must press all parties to immediately stop attacks on civilians, guarantee safe passage for those fleeing, and allow relief operations to reach those cut off by the fighting.

Humanitarian workers and grassroots organisations are risking their lives so that others might live. The world must match their courage with urgent action.

Above all, Sudan’s women and girls must be part of shaping peace. They are already leading by organising, sheltering, and rebuilding amid the chaos. Their courage offers a glimpse of the country Sudan could still become.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

SACRAMENTO — While President Trump was pushing National Guard troops from city to city like some little kid playing with his toy soldiers, California Gov. Gavin Newsom was coaxing voters into fighting the man’s election-rigging scheme.

It turned out to be an easy sell for the governor. By the end, Californians appeared ready to send a loud message that they not only objected to the president’s election rigging but practically all his policies.

Trump is his own worst enemy, at least in this solidly blue state — and arguably the California GOP’s biggest current obstacle to regaining relevancy.

Here’s a guy bucking for the Nobel Peace Prize who suggests that the country resume nuclear weapons testing — a relic of the Cold War — and sends armed troops into Portland and Chicago for no good reason.

The commander in chief bizarrely authorized Marines to fire artillery shells from a howitzer across busy Interstate 5. Fortunately, the governor shut down the freeway. Or else exploding shrapnel could have splattered heads in some topless convertible. As it was, metal chunks landed only on a California Highway Patrol car and a CHP motorcycle. No injuries, but the president and his forces came across as blatantly reckless.

And while Trump focused on demolishing the First Lady’s historic East Wing of the White House and hitting up billionaire grovelers to pay for a monstrous, senseless $300-million ballroom — portraying the image of a spoiled, self-indulgent monarch — Newsom worked on a much different project. He concentrated on building a high-powered coalition and raising well over $100 million to thwart the president with Proposition 50.

The ballot measure was Newsom’s and California Democrats’ response to Trump browbeating Texas and other red states to gerrymander congressional districts to make them more Republican-friendly. The president is desperate to retain GOP control of the House of Representatives after next year’s midterm elections.

Newsom retaliated with Prop. 50, aimed at flipping five California House seats from Republican to Democrat, neutralizing Texas’ gerrymandering.

It’s all sleazy, but Trump started it. California’s Democratic voters, who greatly outnumber Republicans, indicated in preelection polling that they preferred sleazy redistricting to an unhinged president continuing to reign roughshod over a cowardly, subservient Congress.

A poll released last week by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies found that 93% of likely Democratic voters supported Prop. 50. So did 57% of independents. Conversely, symbolic of Trump’s hold on the GOP and our political polarization, 91% of Republicans opposed the measure.

Similar partisan voting was found in a survey by the Public Policy Institute of California. Pollster Mark Baldassare said that “96% of the people voting yes on 50 disapprove of Trump.”

Democrats — 94% of them — also emphatically disapproved of the Trump administration’s immigration raids, the PPIC poll showed. Likewise, 67% of independents. But 84% of Republicans backed how the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency was rounding up people living here illegally.

ICE agents shrouded in masks and not wearing identification badges while traveling in unmarked vehicles — raiding hospitals, harassing school kids and chasing farmworkers — are not embraced in diverse, immigrant-accepting California.

When the PPIC poll asked voters how undocumented immigrants should be handled, 69% — including 93% of Democrats — chose this response: “There should be a way for them to stay in the country legally.” But 67% of Republicans said they should be booted.

The ICE raids were among the Trump actions — and flubs — that helped generate strong support for Prop. 50. It was the voters’ device for sticking it to the president.

“Californians are concerned about the overreach of the federal government and that helped 50,” Democratic consultant Roger Salazar says. “It highlights how much the Trump administration has pushed the envelope. And a yes vote on Prop. 50 was a response to that.”

Jonathan Paik, director of a Million Votes Project coalition that contacted 2 million people promoting Prop. 50, says: “We heard very consistently from voters that they were concerned about the impact of Trump’s ICE raids and the rising cost of living. These raids don’t just target immigrants, they destabilize entire communities and deepen economic struggles.

“Voters saw Prop. 50 as a way to restore balance and protect their families’ ability to work, pay rent and live safely.”

The measure also provided a platform for Democratic U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla of California to explore possibly joining a crowded field of candidates running for governor. Newsom is termed-out after next year.

The Trump administration did Padilla a gigantic favor in June by roughing up the senator and handcuffing him on the floor when he tried to query Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem during a Los Angeles news conference about ICE raids. Such publicity for a politician is golden.

Padilla became a leading advocate for Prop. 50 while seriously considering a gubernatorial bid. The senator said he’d decide after Tuesday’s special election.

“I haven’t made any decision,” he told me last week. “Sometime in the next several weeks.”

But it’s tempting for this L.A. native, the son of Mexican immigrants who was inspired to enter politics by anti-immigrant bashing in the 1990s.

“I’d have an opportunity and responsibility to be a leading voice against that,” he said. “California can be a leader for the rest of the country on immigration, environmental protection, reproduction quality, healthcare…”

In many ways it already is. But Trump hates that. And California Republicans step in it by meekly following the hugely unpopular president. Prop. 50 is the latest result.

California Republicans can do better than behave like Trump’s wannabe reserve toy soldiers.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: A youth movement is roiling Democrats. Does age equal obsolescence?
The what happened: Most Americans have avoided shutdown woes. That might change.
The L.A. Times Special: Voters in poll side with Newsom, Democrats on Prop. 50 — a potential blow to Trump and GOP

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

India’s women post 298-7 in Navi Mumbai before bowling South Africa out for 246 to claim the 2025 Cricket World Cup.

India’s women have lifted the Cricket World Cup for the first time after beating South Africa by 52 runs in Navi Mumbai, India.

Reaching the final for a third time, Harmanpreet Kaur’s side dominated the contest from the off at DY Patil Stadium on Sunday, although South Africa captain Laura Wolvaardt did her best to spoil the hosts’ party in the run chase.

Replying to India’s 298-7, Wolvaardt led from the off and totalled 101 off 98 when she was eventually caught in the deep off the bowling off Deepti Sharma, who finished with 5-39.

The support was not there for Wolvaardt, unlike that enjoyed throughout a team effort with the bat by India, as South Africa regularly lost wickets at the other end before being bowled out for 246 in the 46th over.

Wolvaardt’s heroic effort added to the century she scored in the semifinal win against England on Thursday. She is only the second player to achieve the feat of the back-to-back centuries at this stage of the competition after Alyssa Healy did so in Australia’s victorious run in the 2022 edition.

Neither team has lifted the trophy; indeed, this was South Africa’s first final.

India had come close twice before, reaching the final in 2005 and 2017, losing to Australia and England, respectively.

This was also the first women’s World Cup final that did not involve either Australia or England, the former being the record winners with seven victories to their name.

Having been put in, after a long delay due to rain, India posted the second-highest total in a women’s World Cup final. But they will feel they should have comfortably cleared 300, having reached 151-1 at the halfway stage of their innings.

Opener Smriti Mandhana’s 45 meant the India batter finished with 434 runs for the tournament.

It puts her top of India’s list of run scorers at a World Cup ahead of Mithali Raj, who registered 409 in the 2017 edition.

The limelight on the day belonged to her opening partner, however, as Shafali Verma struck 87 off 78.

Deepti Sharma’s run-a-ball 58 kept the momentum going through the middle over, while Richa Ghosh thumped two sixes in an innings of 34 off 24 late on that marked the best strike-rate of the innings.

South Africa started the chase solidly enough, the opening pair bringing up the fifty partnership in the 10th over. The loss of Tazmin Brits, run out by a brilliant piece of fielding by Amanjot Kaur for 23, started a wobble, though.

Anneke Bosch pushed back a painful six-ball duck before being trapped LBW by Sree Charani.

Verma then came to the party with the ball, picking up Sune Luus and Marizanne Kapp to leave South Africa reeling on 123-4 in the 23rd over.

When Sinalo Jafta fell in the 30th with her side 148-5, it was difficult to see a way back for a team hoping to be the first senior side from their country to lift a major International Cricket Council (ICC) title.

By the time Wolvaardt’s innings was done, India’s women knew they were about to go one better than their male counterparts, who similarly hosted the 2023 edition only to be denied by Australia in the final.

Follow our live build-up, team news, score and text commentary stream from the final in Navi Mumbai at 09:30 GMT.

Hello and happy Thursday. It’s me again, California columnist Anita Chabria, filling in for your usual host, Washington bureau chief Michael Wilner, who will be back next week.

California’s Proposition 50, the measure that would redraw election maps to favor Democrats, started out seeming controversial and likely to spark a huge battle.

But in recent days, it’s become clear that the majority of Californians are pro-50. So much so that Gov. Gavin Newsom has offered up the ultimate taunt — he’s ended small-donor fundraising on the measure. Can you imagine President Trump telling MAGA, “Keep your five bucks. It’s better in your pocket than mine.”

So it’s sort of like Newsom is walking across the finish line flush with swagger and cash — maybe not wise, but a statement.

Obviously, Newsom will soon be asking for more money for more things, including his was-never-not-happening presidential bid. But for now, the narrative he’s crafted with Proposition 50 (win or lose, because truly you don’t know until the last ballot is counted) is a consequential and important win for democracy and a ray of hope for the next election, merely a year away.

Here’s why.

Gov. Gavin Newsom and Texas state Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins appear at a news conference in July at the governor’s mansion.

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

It was never unpopular

The big secret you should know about Proposition 50 is that it was never unpopular with California’s blue voters.

Sure, Republicans hate it. Especially those, such as Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin), who will probably lose their jobs if it passes. I’ll give Kiley credit on this — he for a short bit tried to convince his party that all mid-decade redistricting was bad. He had no luck, mostly because House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) rolls like jelly when it comes to Trump.

But the majority of Republicans in California and across the country have offered nary a whisper in condemnation of red-tilting cheat maps.

In truth, Proposition 50 started out as a bluff — nothing more than a way to push back on Texas Republicans who were working at full speed to appease Trump by rejiggering their own maps to provide him with a safe margin of seats for the midterms.

Hoping to deter Texas appeasement GOPers from this scorched-earth pursuit, Texas Democratic congressional representatives started floating the rumor this year that if the Lone Star State went forward with its scheme to create five extra red seats, California would do the same for blue. It was nothing more than a bit of tit-for-tat blustering.

There was, however, no such plan by Newsom, and insiders say the feint took the governor by surprise. But kind of a happy surprise, because the idea caught on like wildfire and — even more surprising — turned out to be legally doable.

Newsom’s team did a couple of polls and guess what? Yep, voters wanted to fight back against Trump’s takeover. Congressional Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi, agreed to back the measure and fundraise and here we are: A poll by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by The Times, found that 6 in 10 likely voters support the measure, and of those who have already voted, 67% are in favor.

That backs up another new poll by the Public Policy Institute of California that found 56% of likely voters support the measure, mostly along party lines. Forty-three percent are against it.

Only 2% were undecided in The Times’ poll, and that dropped to 1% in the PPIC poll.

So Californians have made up their minds — now they just need to mail in their ballots (I swear I will send mine very, very soon).

What will 50 actually do?

So let’s say Proposition 50 does sail to victory. What then? Will it really save democracy, which is really in need of saving?

Probably not. Maybe. Hopefully? Here’s the truth. Our elections are in hugely big trouble, which I wrote about on Tuesday. For the vast majority of you who didn’t read that, here’s the recap: Donald Trump will probably try to cheat.

That suppression may take many forms. It could be new rules to make it harder to vote — such as requiring multiple forms of IDs with matching names (which many married women lack). It could involve something as dire as military “protection” of our polls. It may look like another attempt to end mail-in ballots or early voting.

It could involve Mike “Jelly” Johnson refusing to seat elected Democrats, as he is currently doing with Arizona’s newly elected, release-the-Epstein-files Arizona Rep. Adelita Grijalva.

It will almost certainly include charges of voter fraud, which Trump is already yapping about on social media. And it will almost certainly involve Republican gerrymandered maps in states besides Texas (though there are surprising holdouts in some places, including Nebraska).

All of that is to say that the midterms are going to be both a big, steaming mess and historically important.

But Proposition 50 shows that not only is there will to resist this breakdown of democracy, but there are also ways to fight. Whether or not it ultimately is the key to restoring the power check of an independent Congress, it’s an important proof that the fight is not over.

There are a couple of other things that stand out in this moment of uncertainty. First, Newsom is the Comeback Kid. There was a time after Kamala Harris took the Democratic nomination when his chances of ever sitting behind the Resolute Desk seemed slim. But Proposition 50 coincided with, and fed, his new turn as chief troll — and actually as an effective foil — to Trump.

He has quickly become one of the most recognizable leaders nationwide in fighting authoritarianism, and to his credit, he is speaking truth at a difficult moment.

Yes, that benefits him, but I’ll take pro-democracy pushback wherever I find it — and so apparently will other Californians. The same PPIC poll that found the majority of likely voters support Proposition 50 also found that 55% approve of the way Newsom is doing his job, and about half think California is on the right track.

Nationally, he’s gaining ground too. Another poll about the New Hampshire primary, often considered one of the first harbingers of Democratic things to come, found Newsom in second place after former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.

In a couple of other polls, Newsom is in the mix, along with Buttigieg and New York U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. So he’s in the running, and not just in his own head — making Proposition 50 a win for the governor.

But Congress, that’s another story. Californians (and Americans in general) are not pleased with their congressional representatives. The PPIC poll found that only 14% of California adults are happy with the way Congress is doing its job. Honestly, judging from the way I feel about it, that seems high.

So keep your eye on California races, even after the maps are redrawn. The youngs are after the olds, and voters seem ready for change. Pelosi is facing two serious challengers, including state Sen. Scott Wiener. In Sacramento, Rep. Doris Matsui has a youthful contender.

California voters may end up wanting even more change than Democrats anticipate. They’re clearly in a mood to fight, and no telling with whom.

What else you should be reading:

The must-read: We checked DHS’s videos of chaos and protests. Here’s what they leave out.
The what happened: The Republicans thwarting the White House’s redistricting hopes
The L.A. Times special: ICE officials replaced with Border Patrol, cementing hard tactics that originated in California

P.S. More from Homeland Security. This is deeply disturbing propaganda being produced and disseminated without much remark by an armed federal agency. For those who aren’t J.R.R. Tolkien nerds, it’s a reference to a great evil destroying society. Whether or not you support the removal of undocumented people, the portrayal of all undocumented folks as evil and dangerous is well … dangerous. And wrong.

Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Nadia Sawalha explains her swollen appearance as she details her painful health condition after a discussion with Dr Zoe which has left her face feeling ‘bruised’

Loose Women star Nadia Sawalha is suffering from a painful health condition as she opens up about her appearance and her experience chatting to Dr Zoe Williams.

During the show on Thursday, 30 October, Jane Moore asked Nadia the reason she had her glasses on and opted for a no-makeup look. Nadia joked that in the past, if she wore her glasses, then people would think she was hungover, before she explained that her face felt ‘bruised’ due to her stress levels.

She discussed how she thought it was an allergy at first before explaining: “It just feels a bit bruised, but lovely doctor Zoe came and saw me, I had my own session with her in my dressing room, and I said to her ‘honestly Zoe I think it’s stress’ and she agreed.”

READ MORE: Frankie Bridge fumes ‘it’s not about me’ after Michael McIntyre’s subtle digREAD MORE: Strictly’s Vicky Pattison fights tears as she receives emotional message on It Takes Two

Nadia explained how Zoe suggested taking deep breaths and taking a bit of ‘time out’. Nadia went on to say that she hadn’t cried properly in about ‘two or three years’, saying: “I cry a little bit and then I stop. I honestly think it is that. When we get stressed, why do we think it doesn’t impact our body?” She went on to thank Zoe and said she was a ‘special woman’.

The Loose Women panellist also shared a video on her Instagram page where she revealed her sister couldn’t believe she was going on live TV ‘looking like that’. Nadia revealed her sister said she looked like she ‘had three bottles of sauvignon blanc’ and had ‘fallen asleep in a hedge’.

Fans rushed to send their well wishes as one person wrote: “Bless you Nadia I hope it clears up soon it looks uncomfortable”, while another added: “Ohhh Nadia I love how strong and humble you are. You’re beautiful inside out even with puffy eyes. Hope they get better”.

It follows after Nadia recently opened up on her 23-year marriage, revealing that it nearly ended over her husband’s intense jealousy. The 60-year-old married husband Mark Adderley in 2002 and has previously opened up about hurdles in their relationship.

Nadia spoke in the past about her husband achieving sobriety after struggling with alcohol for many years and being diagnosed with Bipolar II disorder and depression back in 2021. Now, the TV personality has revealed that after quitting alcohol, Mark began to suffer with jealousy.

Nadia told the ITV show: “My kids hate it what doesn’t kill us makes us stronger but I think that it probably has with Mark and I. I think about when things have been really tough in our marriage and we’ve thought, ‘God we’re not going to get through this’ but then we do.

“For him, it definitely would have been points through my menopause when I was a screaming banshee nutter. I was very difficult, I was awful.”

As for his behaviour that she struggled him, Nadia said: “He’s been brilliant with his sobriety and then after the sobriety, after he got sober, he cross-addicted a lot to jealousy and the jealousy was just awful. It was so bad.

“When we went to couples’ counselling, I said that unless you do some work on this, we’re not going to survive it. It’s something that’s made me love him even more that he’s done work on that.”

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Threads.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom’s anti-Trump, anti-Texas congressional redistricting gamble seems about to pay off.

Newsom’s bet on Proposition 50 is looking like a winner, although we won’t really know until the vote count is released starting election night Nov. 4.

Insiders closely watching the high-stakes campaign would be shocked if Republicans pulled an upset and defeated the Democrats’ retaliatory response to red state gerrymandering.

They talk mostly about the expected size of victory, not whether it will win. The hedged consensus is that it’ll be by a modest margin, not a blowout.

Any size victory would help Newsom promote himself nationally as the Democrat whom party activists anxiously seek to aggressively fight Trumpism. It could energize grassroots progressives to back the Californian in early 2028 presidential primaries.

Propositions 50’s defeat, however, could be a devastating blow to Newsom’s presidential aspirations. If Californians wouldn’t follow him, why should other people?

Private and independent polls have shown Proposition 50 being supported by a small majority of registered voters. Not enough for an early victory dance. But the opposition is nowhere close to a majority. A lot of people have been undecided. They may not even bother to vote in a special election with only one state measure on the ballot.

As of last week, the return of mail-in ballots was running about the same as in last year’s presidential election at the same point — very unusual.

A slightly higher percentage of Democrats were casting ballots than GOP registrants. This is particularly significant in a state where 45% of voters are Democrats and only 25% are Republicans. The GOP needs a humungous turnout to beat Democrats on almost anything.

You can credit President Trump’s antics for riling up Democrats to vote early.

One practical importance of early Democratic voting is that the “yes” side doesn’t need to spend more money appealing to people who have already mailed in their ballots.

“It’s a bird in the hand kind of thing,” says Paul Mitchell, the Democrats’ chief data processor and principal drawer of the gerrymandered congressional maps up for approval in Proposition 50.

Mitchell believes the large recent weekend turnouts in California of “No Kings” protesters are indicative of the anti-Trump outrage that is generating Democratic enthusiasm for Proposition 50.

Republican consultant Rob Stutzman thinks that Proposition 50 could have been beaten with enough money. But not nearly enough showed up. Potential donors probably concluded it was a lost cause, he says. Don’t waste the cash.

It takes ridiculous amounts of money to win a competitive statewide race in California, with 23 million diverse voters scattered over hundreds of miles and several costly media markets.

Democrats, with their unmatched California power, have raised well over $100 million from unions, billionaire Democratic donors and other political investors.

Billionaire hedge-fund founder Tom Steyer put up $12 million. There are rumors he’s tempted to run for governor.

Los Angeles developer Rick Caruso is thinking very seriously about entering the 2026 gubernatorial race. He just paid for 100,000 pro-50 mail pieces in L.A. County, aimed at those least likely to vote.

One problem for the opposition is that it never unified behind a main anti-50 message. It ranged from “reject Newsom’s power grab” to “win one for Trump” and a purist lecture about retaining California’s current congressional districts drawn by a voter-created good government citizens’ commission.

The basic pro-50 message is simply, as Steyer says in his TV ad: “Stick it to Trump.”

This contest at its core is about which party controls Congress after next year’s midterm elections — or whether Republicans and Democrats at least share power. It’s about whether there’ll be a Congress with some gumption to confront a power-mad, egotistical president.

The fight started when Trump banged on Texas to redraw — gerrymander — its congressional districts to potentially gain five more Republican seats in the House of Representatives. Democrats need only a slight pickup to capture House control — and in an off-year election, the non-presidential party tends to acquire many.

Texas obediently obliged the nervous Trump, and other red states also have.

Newsom responded by urging the California Legislature to redraw this state’s maps to potentially gain five Democratic seats, neutralizing Texas’ underhanded move. The lawmakers quickly did. But in California, voter approval is needed to temporarily shelve the independent commission’s work. That’s what Proposition 50 does.

It also would boost Newsom’s standing among party activists across America.

“He’s been trying to claim the national leadership on anti-Trump. This is a chance for him to show he can deliver,” says UC Berkeley political scientist Eric Schickler. “There’s a sense the party doesn’t know how to fight back.

“On the flip side, if he were unable to persuade California voters to go along with him, it would be a hard sell to show Democrats nationally he’s the best person to take on Republicans.”

“It’s a gamble,” says UC San Diego political science professor Thad Kousser. “If 50 wins, he’s a person who can effectively fight back against Donald Trump. If it loses, he has no hope of winning on the national level.”

But veteran political consultant Mike Murphy — a former Republican who switched to independent — thinks Newsom could survive voters’ rejection of Proposition 50.

“It would take some of the shine off him. But he’d still be a contender. It wouldn’t knock him out. The worst you could say was that he lost 50 but was fighting the good fight.

“If 50 wins, Gavin might have a good future as a riverboat gambler if he puts all the chips in.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Pelosi faces challenges as age becomes unavoidable tension point for Democrats
The TK: Justice Department says it will monitor California poll sites amid Prop. 50 voting
The L.A. Times Special: She was highly qualified to be California governor. Why did her campaign fizzle?

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

HOLLYWOOD star Reese Witherspoon is shaken and stirred by James Bond films — saying they objectify women in bikinis.

The Oscar winner, 49, blasted Bond Girls such as Halle Berry and Ursula Andress.

She said: “Women deserve better stories because women save the day all the time.

“We are not wearing bikinis while we do it.”

Reese was in London to plug her co-written novel Gone Before Goodbye.

Reese Witherspoon is best known for her roles in Legally Blonde, critically-acclaimed Walk the Line, and the dark comedy Cruel Intentions.

A FRIGHTFUL PLACE

The little-known town known as Hollywood for horror movies

KENYA BELIEVE IT?

00s singer resurfaces after leaving Hollywood for life on farm in Kenya

She’s been taking home awards since 2006 including Academy Awards, BAFTAs, Teen Choice Awards, and Golden Globes.

She’s set to feature on a new series of The Morning Show alongside Jennifer Aniston.

Her first break came when she appeared in several local TV adverts at just age seven.

She was soon securing major movie roles as a teenager and throughout the 1990s. 

Hello and happy Thursday. It’s Anita Chabria again. Today, I’m coming to you from a coffee shop where I just used Apple Pay to buy a dirty chai.

Why does that matter? Because in the last five minutes, I’ve dropped all kinds of data into the universe. What I drink, how much I’ll pay for it, how long I sat here using this Wi-Fi and dozens of other details that companies are willing to pay for but that I don’t even think about — much less benefit from.

Every day, we all walk around dropping data like garbage — when in reality it’s gold. Especially in the age of budding artificial intelligence, when the smallest bit of insight is being crammed into these new robo-gods in the hope of making them seem ever smarter and more human.

It all raises the question, if it’s our data, shouldn’t we be paid for it?

André Vellozo thinks so, and is working to make that a reality. He’s a Brazilian hippie based in Silicon Valley, an outsider in an increasingly conservative and insular community with an idea that’s more about equality than power.

“Everything you do generates value and data,” Vellozo said. “Now you can collect.”

Here’s what he envisions — and why it’s as much politics as business.

A bus stop advertises Artisan AI, an artificial intelligence software company, along the Embarcadero in downtown San Francisco.

(Florence Middleton / For The Times)

Pennies add up

Think of Vellozo’s idea a bit like streaming royalties, giving you a small paycheck every time information you create is used, be it details of a coffee purchase or your hospital stay. Obviously, an artist could never keep track of every single time their show or song is played — they rely on managers and brokers.

Vellozo’s company, DrumWave, would act as that broker for individuals’ data. In his scenario, every person from birth would have a digital wallet where every bit of data they drop is accounted for. This is stuff you are already creating, whether you’re aware of it or not — and which companies are too often collecting, whether you are aware of it or not.

How many “accept all” buttons have you clicked in your life without reading the details of what you are agreeing to, including allowing others to sell your data for their own profit?

When companies want to use that data — which they do to understand economics in the macro and micro, or to study health outcomes, or to feed those large language models such as ChatGPT — DrumWave packages it and licenses it for use without identifying details, but with each consumer’s consent.

Data goes out, payment comes it — over and over for the life of the account.

It’s not as far-fetched as it might seem. Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed a similar idea in 2019, arguing, “California’s consumers should also be able to share in the wealth that is created from their data.”

Nothing ever came of it, in no small part due to the lobbying and money thrown at government by big tech. I asked the governor’s office if there was still any interest around the idea and got nothing back from them. But California already has a law that could give folks control of their data, though it isn’t often used the way Vellozo envisions.

Downsides

There are, of course, many obstacles and potential pitfalls. Data privacy is one that comes up often — do we really want to be selling the details of our most recent colonoscopy, anonymous or not?

And of course, there’s also the potential for exploitation. What data would the poor or desperate be willing to sell, and how cheaply?

Annemarie Butler is an associate professor of philosophy at Iowa State University who specializes in the ethics of AI. She wonders if people would really understand what their data was being used for or by whom, and if they would be able to pull it back in any way once it’s out there.

She also said that there may be no meaningful way to opt out.

“Our own data are not always restricted to that one person,” she warns. “DNA is probably the clearest example of this: When one shares a DNA sample, she shares vital (and immutable) information about any of her blood relatives. And yet only she provides the consent.”

Of course, privacy is something of an illusion right now.

And, Vellozo points out, it’s not just that we are currently giving data away for free under the current system — we are all actually paying to create that data in the first place. We pay for the electricity that charges our phones. We pay the monthly service charge on our devices. We are actively putting in our time and labor to create the information.

Vellozo’s company is currently running a pilot of digital wallets with rideshare drivers in California.

He points out that these drivers spend a lot of money and energy creating information that will likely be used to train their AI replacements — their gas, the cost of the car, insurance, maintenance and time. Then all that information — who they pick up, when, how long the ride is and a million other details — is just collected and used to create profit for others.

In another milestone, Brazil — a country that has embraced a national model of digital payments much to the chagrin of many technology and banking companies, and President Trump for that matter — is on board with the idea of a digital wallet for all citizens. Vellozo was back home this week to work on that effort.

A check on AI

So why does all this matter in a politics newsletter?

Beyond money, data ownership offers another benefit: Regulation. Although California has arguably done more to regulate AI than almost any other state, the controls on the technology remain woefully slim. The federal government, after a fancy dinner redolent in flattery at the White House, has made it clear it has no interest in protecting people from this powerful technology, or the men who would wield it.

Vellozo sees the ownership of data as an important step in curbing the power of corporations to pursue ever-mightier AI models without oversight.

The coming changes induced by artificial intelligence are going to be profound for the average person. Already, we are seeing a world in which physical money, or at least the movement of it, is increasingly a relic. Financial companies are becoming tech companies, and money is digital (yes, economists, I know this is technically too simple).

Combine that with the changes in our ability to earn money through work, and the power imbalance already faced by the poor and working class becomes, well, really bad. Remember the railroad barons? This is going to make it seem like they were running ice cream trucks.

We need to rethink what a successful economy looks like. Because AI is going to give a few people not just a lot of money, but a lot of power — by scavenging the knowledge and work of the rest of us. It will take all of us to build successful AI, but the rewards will go to a handful.

So the idea of owning our data is not really about Vellozo’s company or if it accomplishes its goal.

It’s about creating a future in which individual power isn’t a thing of the past.

And where the coming changes benefit society, not just the corporate titans who would like us all to remain too confused to object.

What else you should be reading:

The must-read: Just like humans, AI can get ‘brain rot’ from low-quality text and the effects appear to linger, pre-print study says
The what happened: Trump empowers election deniers, still fixated on 2020 grievances
The L.A. Times special: Malibu residents flee as international buyers snap up burned-out lots

P.S. We’re continuing to look at the blatant (and frankly frightening) propaganda that Homeland Security is posting on its official social media. Case in point, this recruitment ad with … medieval knights? Not only is this image chock-full of Christian nationalism dog whistles, it’s aimed at the young men Immigration and Customs Enforcement is hoping to recruit with its edgelord/video game fanatasies that would turn legimate law enforcement efforts into a religious crusade against immigrants.

Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

In Kwara, a Muslim-majority state in north-central Nigeria where religious traditions govern daily life, some young women are defying cultural expectations through football.

They have discovered the camaraderie, competitive spirit, and emotional journey of the sport, while facing disapproval from those who question its appropriateness for modestly dressed women.

When 17-year-old Maryam Muhammed heads to practise at the Model Queens Football Academy in Ilorin, she endures the intense heat — made more challenging by her hijab and leggings — and community criticism.

“They tell me I will not achieve anything. But I believe I will achieve something big,” she says, despite regularly encountering taunts on her way to training.

Though sometimes uncomfortable, maintaining modest dress while playing is non-negotiable for her.

“Sometimes it feels like I want to open the hijab, but I must not expose my hair,” she explained. “I have to put it on as a good Muslim.”

FIFA initially banned hijabs in 2007 on safety grounds, resulting in Iran’s women’s team being excluded from a 2012 Olympic qualifier. The restriction was eased in 2012 and fully lifted in 2014. Morocco’s Nouhaila Benzina made history as the first hijab-wearing player at a senior women’s World Cup in 2023.

Kehinde Muhammed, Maryam’s mother, has weathered criticism for supporting her daughter’s passion. “So many people discouraged me,” she admitted. “But I respect my children’s decisions. I support her and keep praying for her.”

She creates custom hijabs matching team jerseys, emphasising: “I counsel her that this is the normal way you are supposed to be dressed as a Muslim.”

Model Queens coach Muyhideen Abdulwahab works to change community perceptions. “We go out to meet parents, to tell them there are laws in place for modest dressing,” he said. “Despite that, some still say no.”

Nineteen-year-old team member Bashirat Omotosho balances her love for football with family responsibilities. She often misses training to help her mother sell puff puff, a fried dough snack, at their roadside stall to support the family.

“Training is often in the morning, but I have to be here,” she explained while serving customers, watching her teammates sometimes jog past during practice. “I cannot leave my mum — this is how I earn money.”

Titilayo Omotosho, Bashirat’s mother, initially opposed her daughter’s athletic ambitions.

“Why would a lady choose football?” she questioned.

Omotosho’s stance softened after her husband’s approval and seeing successful Muslim players like Nigeria star Asisat Oshoala. “Seeing other Muslim girls succeed, like Asisat, encouraged us to let her play,” she said, referencing the record six-time African Women’s Footballer of the Year. Oshoala, who plays without a hijab, comes from Lagos in southwest Nigeria, where Islamic practices are less conservative.

According to local football administrator Ambali Abdulrazak, despite growing interest, female participation remains limited in Ilorin.

The Nigeria Women’s Football League (NWFL) ranks among Africa’s strongest, dominated by southern clubs from Lagos and Port Harcourt, where infrastructure and social support are more established. Northern and central regions face cultural and religious barriers, though grassroots initiatives are expanding.

Nationwide, women’s football is gaining popularity, driven by the national team’s success, increased sponsorships, and development programmes. Since 2020, NWFL viewership has increased by 40 percent, with match attendance rising 35 percent in 2024, according to Nigerian media company iTelemedia, which monitors audience trends across local leagues.

During a recent training session, Muhammed and her teammates practised on a sandy school pitch as the sun set, their voices mingling with the muezzin’s call to prayer from a nearby mosque.

On August 29, Muhammed captained the Model Queens in a youth tournament final, which they lost. She high-fived teammates and celebrated as they received runners-up medals, but later cried alone in her room over the defeat.

Her family’s support and faith sustain her determination. “I really love this sport. I have a passion for it,” she said. “Since my parents support me, there is nothing stopping me. Football is my dream.”

BATON ROUGE, La. — Women taken into custody by U.S. immigration agents while pregnant say they received inadequate care in a letter Wednesday that calls on the Trump administration to stop holding expectant mothers in federal detention facilities.

The letter to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is part of a broader campaign in recent months by Democrats and immigrant rights groups to draw attention to what they say is the mistreatment of pregnant detainees.

The Department of Homeland Security has defended its care, saying pregnant detainees get regular prenatal visits, mental health services, nutritional support and accommodations “aligned with community standards of care.”

In addition, Homeland Security Department spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a written statement Wednesday that such detentions are “rare” and involve “elevated oversight and review.” The agency didn’t provide figures on the number of pregnant women in detention, a number Democrats have sought for months.

The letter sent by the American Civil Liberties Union cites accounts from pregnant women who say they were shackled while being transported, placed in solitary confinement for multiple days and given insufficient food and water while detained in Louisiana and Georgia.

The ACLU said that over the last five months it has met with more than a dozen females who were pregnant while in ICE custody — including some who had a miscarriage while detained. The women reported “gravely troubling experiences,” the letter states, including lack of translation during medical encounters and medical neglect. One suffered a “severe” infection after her miscarriage.

In an interview with the Associated Press, one of the women said she was kept in handcuffs while being transported to Louisiana — a journey that lasted five hours and spanned two plane rides. The woman, who has since been released from custody and given birth, spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of facing retaliation during her ongoing case.

An officer told her he considered taking off the handcuffs but worried she would escape. “How am I going to escape if I’m pregnant?” the woman said she responded.

She said she felt as if she’d been kidnapped and experienced dizziness, nausea and vaginal bleeding. During her time in detention, she said pregnant women were not offered special diets and described the food as horrible. She alleged that detainees had to “beg” for water and toilet paper.

The ACLU’s letter is the latest call for an investigation into the arrests and treatment of pregnant detainees.

Senate Democrats wrote Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in September, expressing concerns about the “prevalence and treatment” of pregnant, postpartum and nursing women in ICE custody. They demanded that the agency stop detaining such people unless there are “exceptional circumstances.”

“Proper care for pregnancy is a basic human right, regardless of whether you are incarcerated or not and regardless of your immigration status,” said Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove, a California Democrat. She signed on to a Democratic Women’s Caucus letter to Homeland Security officials in July sharing concerns about the “treatment of women” and demanding answers — including how many have given birth while detained.

Kamlager-Dove said she’s working on legislation that would “severely restrict the use of restraints on pregnant, laboring and postpartum women who are in federal custody.”

ICE guidelines already say that agents “should not detain, arrest, or take into custody for an administrative violation of the immigration laws” people “known to be pregnant, postpartum or nursing,” based on a policy sent to the AP by Homeland Security. But the document does state that such people may be detained and held in custody under “exceptional circumstances” or if their release is prohibited by law.

The policy also prohibits using restraints on pregnant detainees, but here too there are exceptions — including if there is a serious threat that the detainee will hurt herself or others, or if “an immediate and credible risk” of escape cannot be “reasonably minimized” through other methods.

Cline and Gonzalez write for the Associated Press. Gonzalez reported from McAllen, Texas.

Beyond the Cuban diaspora, the genre known as reparto is overwhelmingly unknown. But on the streets of Havana and Hialeah, Miami, reparto is inescapable, pulsing from balconies and portable speakers on the beach.

Born in Cuba’s working-class neighborhoods — known colloquially as repartos — this hyperkinetic fusion of reggaetón, timba and Afro-Cuban rhythms has become the island’s score. In the mid-2000s, artists like Chocolate MC and Elvis Manuel built the genre’s sound on distorted synth stabs, shouted call-and-response hooks, and the distinct Cuban clave beat that makes your body move before your brain can even catch up.

It’s also become a platform for youth navigating scarcity, surveillance and dreams of escaping poverty. The lyrics, characteristically and unapologetically obscene, reflect the realities of life in marginalized communities. But alongside its rhythmic bravado, reparto’s explicit language often veers into the dehumanizing and misogynistic.

The music centers on women, but more often than not, as objects: the perra to conquer, the diabla to tame, the culo to catalog in explicit detail. And it’s no surprise: The genre’s blunt portrayal of women mirrors the machismo deeply embedded in everyday Cuban life.

It’s a refrain you’re bound to hear in any and every nightclub: “¿Donde están las mujeres?” But the next time 10 reparteros link up for a track, they probably won’t call a woman. Within a genre that revolves so heavily around their bodies, women’s voices still remain rare.

So, ¿dónde están las mujeres? Or, where are the women making reparto?

“Chocolate is the king, but who is the queen?” says Seidy Carrera, known artistically as Seidy La Niña. “There’s a space that needs to be filled with women. There’s no f—ing women!”

At the onset of reparto, early reparteras like Melissa and Claudia slipped brief female cameos into club anthems. More than a decade later, due to Cuba’s only recent, and still extremely limited, internet access, these artists and their collaborations have a seemingly untraceable digital footprint. Still, most playlists orbit male voices, and collaborations rarely invite women to the booth: “When reparteros come together on a track, they never call a woman,” she says.

Carrera, 32, was born in the reparto El Cotorro and raised in Miami since she was 6. The self-proclaimed queen of reparto, the paradox defines her career: She fights for space in a scene whose appeal lies in her raw neighborhood realism, but detractors question her authenticity as a gringa, or as they would call her, yuma.

“I feel resistance every day, every single day,” she says. In response, she reclaims the discriminatory language used against her; onstage, she chants “más perra que bonita,” flipping the curse-word from insult to empowerment.

“It’s empowering to say, I’m more perra than pretty. To me, being a perra is being a woman who’s exclusive, who makes her own money. In my case, … nobody opened the door for me, nobody gave me a hand.”

For Havana-based singer-composer Melanie Santiler, 24, the double standard hits her before she can even sing her first note: “I feel that I have to do twice as well. I have to put in double the thought, double the effort, double the talent, always having something more to say,” she says.

“It’s exhausting. It’s exhausting being a woman, having to get up and tell yourself, damn, I have to look pretty and put together. I spent my whole life in school with an onion bun because I didn’t want to do my hair,” Santiler says and laughs, messy bun flopping around her face.

Reaching almost 5 million YouTube views on her 2025 viral collab, “Todo se Supera” with Velito el Bufón, she’s broken into the reparto space as one of the genre’s most distinctive voices. Beside this rise, she’s faced a newfound pressure to dress a way she normally wouldn’t, a beauty standard her masculine counterparts don’t face.

Aliaisys Alvarez Hernández — better known as Ozunaje — says she doesn’t face the same criticism in the urban Cuban music scene, likely due to her sexuality and more masculine appearance. “Reparto is a genre for men, that’s how I see it,” she says. “I dress like a man, I practically live my life like a man, so what I write resembles what men are already saying. That also gave me an impulse, where I feel like more feminine artists, they have to work harder.”

A former rhythmic gymnast from La Habana, Hernández, 23, stumbled into music when friends recorded her singing a demo of “Cosas del Amor” in her living room. Someone uploaded the video, it went viral, and suddenly, she had a career. Since that start, Hernández refuses to only be compared with other reparteras.

Her goal has always been to be measured against men, since “that’s who people actually listen to.” Dressing in traditionally masculine clothing, paired with a deep, raspy delivery, helps her lyrics resonate with locals without the extra hurdle of hyper-sexualized expectations.

Hernández’s androgynous wardrobe and open queerness bring another layer of potential discrimination, but despite the rampant homophobia persistent in present-day Cuba, she doesn’t feel much resistance. “The worst word they throw at me is tortillera, but it doesn’t affect me,” she says, adding, “People like my style, they like that I dress like a guy. Everybody tells me, you have tremendo flow, I love your aguaje, so I haven’t faced any bullying. Never.”

Misogynistic currents in reparto mirror those in early reggaetón, reflecting the average street machismo. The genre’s marginal roots complicate blanket condemnations, since the same raunchy lyrics often encode critiques of class exclusion. Still, reaching bigger stages will require editing the most gratuitous slurs, if only to broaden the music’s export potential. At least, Ozunaje thinks so.

“Reparto came from people who were poor, who had nothing, who were desperate to get out. Nobody imagined it would get this big. Now it’s reaching the whole world, so the vocabulary has to evolve,” she says.

Santiler echoes this critique. “It’s become really repetitive. I think right now, everyone is talking about the same thing. It’s been really easy. Facilista,” she says, using the Spanish term for taking the easy way out. Santiler loves reparto’s swing, but calls most of it objectifying, pointing to Bad Bunny’s “Andrea” and “Neverita,” along with C. Tangana’s “El Madrileño,” as proof that urban music can expand beyond bedroom conquests.

“The street already says these things, and reparto just writes it. It’s an image of what’s happening. But I grew up with other types of music and other types of references, so I’d like to expand beyond that, to make something fresh.”

Santiler adds that the basis of reparto, both in her gratitude and her criticism, comes from pride.

“I love Cuba, I love my country. The current generation of Cuba doesn’t reject their identity — they’re doing the opposite. They want to create a new culture, to create a new movement, and they want the world to know Cuba again,” she says.

Appointment clinched via a last-minute coalition deal, but government remains without a majority, leaving the risk of instability.

Japan’s parliament has elected ultraconservative Sanae Takaichi as the nation’s first female prime minister.

A protege of assassinated former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Takaichi received  237 votes in the 465-seat lower house of parliament on Tuesday to confirm her in the role.

The victory follows a last-minute coalition deal by her Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) with the right-wing Japan Innovation Party (JIP), also known as Ishin, on Monday. However, her government is still two seats short of a majority, suggesting a risk of instability.

Takaichi replaces Shigeru Ishiba, ending a three-month political vacuum and wrangling since the LDP – which has governed Japan for most of its post-war history – suffered a disastrous election loss in July.

Her victory marks a pivotal moment for a country where men still hold overwhelming sway. But it is also likely to usher in a sharper move to the right on immigration and social issues, with little expectation that it will help to promote gender equality or diversity.

Takaichi has stonewalled measures for women’s advancement. She supports the imperial family’s male-only succession and opposes same-sex marriage and allowing separate surnames for married couples.

The LDP had earlier lost its longtime partner, the Buddhist-backed Komeito, which has a more dovish and centrist stance.

Komeito ended the partnership due to its concerns that the LDP was not prepared to fight corruption.

“Political stability is essential right now,” Takaichi said at the signing ceremony with the JIP leader and Osaka Governor Hirofumi Yoshimura. “Without stability, we cannot push measures for a strong economy or diplomacy.”

JIP will not hold ministerial posts in Takaichi’s Cabinet until his party is confident about its partnership with the LDP, Yoshimura said.

After years of deflation, Japan is now grappling with rising prices, something that has caused public anger and fuelled support for opposition groups, including far-right upstarts.

Like Abe, Takaichi is expected to favour government spending to jumpstart the weakened economy. That has prompted a so-called “Takaichi trade” in the stock market, sending the Nikkei share average to record highs, the most recent on Tuesday.

But it has also caused investor unease about the government’s ability to pay for additional spending in a country where the debt load far outweighs annual output.

Shortly after the lower house vote, Takaichi’s elevation to prime minister was also approved by the less-powerful upper house. She will be sworn in as Japan’s 104th prime minister on Tuesday evening.

Takaichi is also running on a deadline, as she prepares for a major policy speech later this week, talks with United States President Donald Trump and regional summits.

SACRAMENTO — Some witty person long ago gave us this immortal line: “No man’s life, liberty or property are safe while the legislature is in session.”

Humorist Will Rogers usually is credited — wrongly. Mark Twain, too, falsely.

The real author was Gideon J. Tucker, a former newspaper editor who founded the New York Daily News. He later became a state legislator and judge, and he crafted the comment in an 1866 court opinion.

Anyway, Californians are safe from further legislative harm for now. State lawmakers have gone home for the year after passing 917 bills. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed 794 (87%) and vetoed 123 (13%).

I’m not aware of any person’s life being jeopardized. Well, maybe after the lawmakers and governor cut back Medi-Cal healthcare for undocumented immigrants to save money.

One could argue — and many interests did — that what the Legislature did to increase housing availability made some existing residential neighborhoods less safe from congestion and possible declining property values.

But kudos to the lawmakers and governor for enacting major housing legislation that should have been passed years ago.

Public pressure generated by unaffordable costs — both for homebuyers and renters — spurred the politicians into significant action to remove regulatory barriers and encourage much more development. The goal is to close the gap between short supply and high demand.

But legislative passage was achieved over stiff opposition from some cities — especially Los Angeles — that objected to loss of local control.

“It’s a touchy issue that affects zoning and is always going to be controversial,” says state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who finessed through a bill that will allow construction of residential high-rises up to nine stories near transit hubs such as light-rail and bus stations. The measure overrides local zoning ordinances.

Wiener had been trying unsuccessfully for eight years to get similar legislation passed. Finally, a fire was lit under legislators by their constituents.

“The public understands we’ve screwed ourselves by making it so hard to build homes,” Wiener says.

But to win support, he had to accept tons of exceptions. For example, the bill will affect only counties with at least 15 passenger rail stations. There are eight: Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda and Sacramento.

“Over time it will have a big effect, but it’s going to be gradual,” Wiener says.

Dan Dunmoyer, who heads the California Building Industry Assn., calls it “a positive step in the right direction.”

Yes, and that direction is up rather than sideways. California could accommodate a cherished ranch-house lifestyle when the population was only a third or half the nearly 40 million people it is today. But sprawling horizontally has become impossibly pricey for too many and also resulted in long smog-spewing commutes and risky encroachment into wildfire country.

Dozens of housing bills were passed and signed this year, ranging from minutia to major.

The Legislature continued to peck away at the much-abused California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Opponents of projects have used the act to block construction for reasons other than environmental protection. Local NIMBYs — ”Not in my backyard” — have resisted neighborhood growth. Businesses have tried to avoid competition. Unions have practiced “greenmail” by threatening lawsuits unless developers signed labor agreements.

Another Wiener bill narrowed CEQA requirements for commercial housing construction. It also exempted from CEQA a bunch of nonresidental projects, including health clinics, manufacturing facilities and child-care centers.

A bill by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) exempted most urban infill housing projects from CEQA.

You can’t argue that the Legislature wasn’t productive this year. But you can spar over whether some of the production was a mistake. Some bills were both good and bad. That’s the nature of compromise in a functioning democracy.

One example: The state’s complex cap-and-trade program was extended beyond 2030 to 2045. That’s probably a good thing. It’s funded by businesses buying permits to emit greenhouse gases and pays for lots of clean energy projects.

But a questionable major piece of that legislation — demanded by Newsom — was a 20-year, $1-billion annual commitment of cap-and-trade money for California’s disappointing bullet train project.

The project was sold to voters in 2008 as a high-speed rail line connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco. It’s $100 billion over budget and far behind its promised 2020 completion. No tracks have even been laid. The new infusion of cap-and-trade money will merely pay for the initial 171-mile section between Merced and Bakersfield, which the state vows to open by 2033. Hot darn!

Newsom muscled through the bill at the last moment. The Legislature should have taken more time to study the project’s future.

One gutsy thing Democratic legislators and the governor did — given that “oil,” among the left, has become the new hated pejorative sidekick of “tobacco” — was to permit production of 2,000 more wells annually in oil-rich Kern County.

It was part of a compromise: Drilling in federal offshore waters was made more difficult by tightening pipeline regulations.

Credit the persistent Sen. Shannon Grove, a conservative Republican from Bakersfield who is adept at working across the aisle.

“Kern County knows how to produce energy,” she told colleagues during the Senate floor debate, citing not only oil but wind, solar and battery storage. “We are the experts. We are not the enemy.”

But what mostly motivated Newsom and legislators was the threat of even higher gas prices as two large California oil refineries prepare to shut down. Most Democrats agreed that the politically smart move was to allow more oil production, even as the state attempts to transcend entirely to clean energy.

Let’s not forget the most important bill the Legislature annually passes: the state budget. This year’s totaled $325 billion and allegedly covered a $15-billion deficit through borrowing, a few cuts and numerous gimmicks.

Nonpartisan Legislative Analyst Gabriel Petek last week projected deficit spending of up to $25 billion annually for the next three years.

In California, no state bank account is safe when the Legislature is in session.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Sen. Scott Wiener to run for congressional seat held by Rep. Nancy Pelosi
California vs. Trump: Federal troops in San Francisco? Locals, leaders scoff at Trump’s plan
The L.A. Times Special: One of O.C.’s loudest pro-immigrant politicians is one of the unlikeliest

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

If bill is signed into law, Portugal would join several European countries which already have full or partial bans.

Portugal has approved a bill to ban face veils used for “gender or religious motives” in most public spaces that was proposed by the far-right Chega party and targets burqas and niqabs worn by Muslim women.

Under the bill, approved by parliament on Friday, proposed fines for wearing face veils in public would range from 200 to 4,000 euros ($234-$4,670). Forcing someone to wear one would be punishable with prison terms of up to three years.

Face veils would still be allowed in aeroplanes, diplomatic premises and places of worship.

According to local media reports, the bill is now set to be discussed in the parliamentary committee on Constitutional Affairs, Rights, Freedoms, and Guarantees – a body responsible for reviewing legislation related to constitutional matters.

If signed into law, it would put Portugal alongside European countries, including France, Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands, which already have full or partial bans.

President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa could still veto the bill or send it to the Constitutional Court for checks.

During Friday’s parliamentary session, Chega leader Andre Ventura was confronted by several female lawmakers from left-wing parties who opposed the bill, but it passed with support from the centre-right coalition.

“We are today protecting female members of parliament, your daughters, our daughters, from having to use burqas in this country one day,” Ventura said.

In a post on X, he wrote: “Today is a historic day for our democracy and for the safeguarding of our values, our identity and women’s rights.”

Andreia Neto, a lawmaker from the ruling Social Democratic Party, said before the vote: “This is a debate on equality between men and women. No woman should be forced to veil her face.”

Two out of the 10 parties in parliament abstained from the vote – the People-Animals-Nature party, and the Together for the People party, according to local media reports.

The parties have suggested that the proposal incited discrimination.

Only a small minority of Muslim women in Europe cover their faces, and in Portugal such veils are very rare.

But full-face coverings such as niqabs and burqas have become a polarising issue across Europe, with some arguing that they symbolise gender discrimination or can represent a security threat and should be outlawed.

Past visits by top leaders to Yasukuni, which honours convicted war criminals, have angered Japan’s neighbours.

The new leader of Japan’s governing party, Sanae Takaichi, has decided not to visit a controversial World War II shrine in Tokyo, as uncertainty remains over whether she will be appointed prime minister ahead of a visit by United States President Donald Trump before the end of the month.

Takaichi, 64, seen as an arch-conservative from the right of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), has previously visited the Yasukuni Shrine, including as a government minister.

However, Takaichi opted on Friday to send an offering, and reports said she was likely to refrain from visiting in order not to antagonise the country’s neighbours whom Imperial Japan had occupied and committed atrocities against in the first half of the 20th century.

Past visits by top leaders to Yasukuni, which honours convicted war criminals, have angered China and South Korea. The last visit by a Japanese premier was in 2013 by the late Shinzo Abe, Takaichi’s mentor.

Takaichi’s decision not to visit the shrine came as Japan’s former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama, best known for making a statement apologising for atrocities Japan committed in Asia over the course of World War II, died aged 101.

Murayama, in office from 1994 to 1996, issued the 1995 “Murayama statement” on the 50th anniversary of Japan’s unconditional surrender.

Murayama died on Friday at a hospital in his hometown, Oita, in southwestern Japan, according to a statement from Mizuho Fukushima, head of Japan’s Social Democratic Party (SDP).

Hiroyuki Takano, secretary-general of the SDP in Oita, told the AFP news agency he had been informed that Murayama died of old age.

Political wrangling

Takaichi became LDP leader on October 4, but her aim to become Japan’s first female prime minister was derailed after the LDP’s coalition partner of 26 years, the Komeito party, pulled the plug on their alliance last week.

The LDP is now in talks about forming a different alliance, boosting Takaichi’s chances of becoming premier in a parliamentary vote that local media reports said will likely happen on Tuesday.

The clock is ticking for Takaichi to become Japan’s fifth prime minister in as many years with Trump’s impending visit.

Details of Washington and Tokyo’s trade deal remain unresolved and Trump – who had warm relations with Abe in his first term – wants Japan to stop Russian energy imports and boost defence spending.

Komeito said that the LDP has failed to tighten rules on party funding following a damaging slush fund scandal involving dodgy payments of millions of dollars.

The LDP this week began talks on forming a new coalition with the Japan Innovation Party instead.

The two parties would be two seats short of a majority but the alliance would still likely ensure that Takaichi succeeds in becoming premier.

A spanner in the works could be if opposition parties agreed on a rival candidate but talks earlier this week appeared to make little headway.

More talks were due to take place on Friday.

Hello and happy Thursday. It’s me, California columnist Anita Chabria, filling in for your usual host, Washington bureau chief Michael Wilner.

Andrea Grossman was a kid when her mother pulled her out of school to join the 1969 Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam, a nationwide day of peaceful protest. They held hands while her mom walked in a knit suit and ladylike shoes, joining more than 2 million people nationwide.

Grossman, now one of the organizers of the Beverly Hills segment of the “No Kings” marches being held in more than 2,000 cities this weekend, remembers that opponents of that long-ago protest threw stinky rat poison on the lawns in Exposition Park so participants couldn’t sit on the grass. But protesters were not deterred.

“It made it all the more rebellious of us to be there,” Grossman told me. “It made us more insistent that we had to be there.”

Today, that rat poison is being metaphorically hurled by MAGA leaders such as House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), in the form of noxious allegations that the No Kings marches are “Hate America” rallies staged for a “rabid base” of criminal agitators.

“It’s all the pro-Hamas wing and the antifa people, they’re all coming out,” Johnson said on Fox News.

Of course, that is dumb and false. It would be all too easy to write off comments such as Johnson’s as partisan jibber-jabber, but his insidious words are the kind of poison that seeps into the soil and shouldn’t be ignored.

Participants in the Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam demonstrate in 1969 at Golden Gate Park in San Francisco.

(Clay Geerdes / Getty Images)

The ‘enemy within’

Johnson isn’t the only Republican working overtime to smear everyday folks such as Grossman. Talk about organized campaigns — Trumpites are all going after No Kings with the same script.

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) said: “These guys are playing to the most radical, small, and violent base in the country. You’ll see them on Saturday on the Mall. They just do not love this country.”

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has parroted similar messaging, and Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), diving into old, antisemitic conspiracies, described the events as “a Soros paid-for protest,” adding that the National Guard would probably need to be activated.

U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi added her two cents, apparently confusing printed signs, the kind that say, a union or organizations such as Planned Parenthood or the ACLU, might have made up, with evidence of diabolical terrorist networks.

“You’re seeing people out there with thousands of signs that all match,” Bondi told Fox News. “They are organized and someone is funding it. We are going to get to the funding of antifa, we’re going to get to the root of antifa and we are going to find and charge all of those people who are causing this chaos.”

Note to Bondi: Matching signs are not a conspiracy. Just ask Kinko’s.

But in her defense, it was a mere two weeks ago when President Trump addressed the leaders of the U.S. military at Quantico, Va. There, he warned that the use of military troops on American protesters was about to become reality, if he has any say in it.

“This is going to be a big thing for the people in this room, because it’s the enemy from within, and we have to handle it before it gets out of control,” Trump said.

That came on the heels of his executive order declaring antifa — a general descriptor for anyone who opposes fascism — as a terrorist organization.

So to recap: The president declares “antifa” a terrorist organization, warns military brass that they must be ready to defeat internal enemies, then MAGA Republicans begin to falsely claim No Kings rallies are full of “antifa.”

Andrea Grossman, second from left, with other activists in 2024 discussing efforts to protect a Beverly Hills abortion clinic.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Bad journalism

Grossman calls the idea that she is anti-American “preposterous.”

“We wouldn’t be out there spending our time and energy if we weren’t desperately worried for our country. Of course we love America,” she said.

Here’s where I eat my own: Media are failing miserably and unforgivably in covering this issue — this terrifying march to turn peaceful protest into a criminal offense. We shouldn’t be asking Grossman whether she hates America. We should be pushing Johnson and his ilk to defend his attack on people like her.

“We can both recognize that it’s ridiculous and also that it’s pretty sinister,” Leah Greenberg told me.

She’s the co-executive director of Indivisible, the organization behind the No Kings effort, and she’ll be at the D.C. event — the one Johnson specifically condemned. At the first No Kings rally in Philadelphia, her husband led more than 1,000 people in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, some real anti-American stuff.

“We have to see what is currently happening here, not only as Republicans desperately grasping for a message, but also of them creating a permission structure to, you know, invite a broader crackdown on peaceful dissent,” Greenberg warned.

I asked Grossman whether she felt personally at risk by taking on this organizing role at such a fraught moment, even in Beverly Hills, that hotbed of radicalism. At first, she said she didn’t. But when I asked her why not, she paused for a bit.

“We have to put ourselves out there and it takes risk sometimes,” she finally said. “I mean, I don’t consider myself a freedom fighter by any means. I consider myself a woman of a certain age, you know, who has to stand up and be loud and noisy.”

In her regular life, Grossman runs one of the preeminent literary salons in Los Angeles, drawing authors and luminaries including Rob Reiner, Rep. Jasmine Crockett and legal podcaster Joyce Vance. She was also one of the “abortion yentas” who last year fought a losing battle to protect a controversial abortion clinic in the neighborhood. So she knows risk and doesn’t shy away from it.

But this moment is different, because it’s not normal for a president to declare protests to be terrorism, or for legislators to deem them un-American. It is not normal to fear that the military will be used to silence us.

Which is why No Kings is so crucial to this moment.

It is a movement that seeks to draw the most normal, the most average, the most mild of people to highlight just how abnormal this government is. No flags are going to be burned (though that is a protected 1st Amendment right, no matter what Trump says). No Molotov cocktails will be tossed. Hamas is not invited.

Greenberg said that “anybody with eyes” can see who comes to a No Kings rally.

“You see veterans, you see members of faith communities. You see federal workers, dedicated public servants. You see parents and grandparents and kids all coming together in this joyous and defiant opposition,” she said.

Those are exactly the types that turned out in June, when somewhere between 3 million and 6 million people marched in what felt like a cross between a fall school carnival and a Fourth of July parade. People sauntered, they sat, they sang. But most of all, they showed up.

“If we’re going to be afraid and not say anything, then [they] win,” Grossman said. “The only way to stand up to oppression is to get out there in huge, great numbers.”

So like her mom, she’ll march and she’ll ignore the poison — and much to the dismay of MAGA, I suspect millions of others just like her will too.

What else you should be reading:

The must-read: Justices lean toward rejecting race in redistricting, likely boosting GOP in 2026
The what happened: Mike Johnson’s nightmare: Kevin Kiley is unhappy with the speaker and has nothing to lose
The L.A. Times special: USC finds itself in funding battle between Trump and Newsom over the campus’ future

P.S. This is another bit of propaganda from the Department of Homeland Security. “Remigrate” is a term often embraced by the far right that alludes to the forced deportation of immigrants, legal or not, especially those who are not of European origin.

Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

In November 2024, an empty field suddenly turned into a bustling scene. Women streamed in carrying baskets of tomatoes, while others unwrapped sacks of oranges. At the time, teenage girls hawked in the crowd with trays of boiled groundnuts balanced on their heads. Along the roadside, two trailers lined up a few metres away as young men tossed heavy sacks of maize into one and rice into the other.

This was the Tumba Ra Ngabili market.

For a trader like Asmau Abubakar, she never imagined a market like this could exist, especially when she reflects on the years when the Boko Haram insurgency was at its peak. She says her fear grew the first time she heard the insurgents had arrived in Madagali in 2014, a few towns away from Michika, her hometown, both in Adamawa State, northeastern Nigeria.

When rumours spread at the time that the insurgents would not harm women, Asmau urged her husband to flee while she stayed behind with the children. But he refused, insisting the family remain together.

Then came the news that the insurgents were unleashing violence in Gulak. And knowing Gulak was close, Asmau’s family fled to Uba, a neighbouring town, where they passed the night before returning home the next morning.

But the fear never left Asmau. Soon again, word spread that Michika itself would be attacked on a Sunday.

“Before they came, on that Sunday at dawn, my husband got us a car that took us to Yola [the Adamawa State capital] while he fled on foot, passing several villages to reach Gombi,” Asmau recalled. “We were at Mararraban Mubi when I heard the insurgents had entered Michika.”

Many families, like Asmau’s, fled for safety. But that Sunday in September 2014 carried the memory of gunfire echoing in the air, houses burning in flames, and, of course, the lives taken in cold blood. The insurgents did not only stop at attacking Michika, they in fact seized the town and spread into nearby villages, inflicting fear and hardship on the locals. It was a period when they were expanding across northeastern Nigeria in their bid to carve out an Islamic caliphate.

Boko Haram’s violent campaign had started five years earlier in 2009, first as an uprising in Maiduguri, the Borno State capital, before spreading across the region. In its wake, families mourned their loved ones, schools and markets were left destroyed, and dozens of communities were turned to ruins, with over a million people uprooted from their homes.

Michika was soon trapped in this same cycle of bloodshed and chaos that forced people across Borno, Adamawa, and Yobe to live with fear as part of daily life. Meanwhile, the insurgents held the town captive for months until January 2015, when Nigeria’s military finally drove them out. So, as locals began to return, they discovered that what awaited them were wrecked houses and the loss of nearly everything they owned.

“The walls of my house were riddled with bullets,” Asmau told HumAngle. “They destroyed doors and windows and looted some of our belongings.”

Even as Asmau and other families in Michika began to rebuild and piece their lives back together, they realised that the insurgency had sown deep distrust between Christians and Muslims. The divide between the two faiths grew so intense that, according to locals HumAngle spoke with, it spread into the main Michika market, where Christians chose Saturdays to sell their farm produce and Muslims traded on Sundays when most Christians were in church.

Asmau has not forgetten that period when she moved between the main Michika market and those in Bazza and Lassa to buy and sell bags of maize, beans, and groundnuts.

“Relations between us Muslims and the Christians became strained,” she explained. “They thought the majority of Muslims were Boko Haram.”

HumAngle also learned that, at the time, Muslims said their children could not have relationships with children from Christian families, and Christians equally insisted their children would not relate to Muslim families.

Rebuilding Trust

This situation persisted in Tumba Ra Ngabili, Asmau’s community, until 2020, when the British Council, in partnership with the Women and Youth Economic Advancement and Health Initiative (WYEAHI), brought women from the area into its Managing Conflict in Nigeria (MCN) programme.

About 200 women from Christian and Muslim households received training in peacebuilding, conflict management, and Early Warning and Early Response (EWER).

“We learned that due to the insurgency, these women lost their livelihoods. So we felt it would be good that after the training, we should also empower them,” said Aishatu Margima, WYEAHI’s Executive Director.

The women were organised into groups of 20, with each member receiving ₦30,000 to start a business or support an existing one.

“I was happy when my name made it to the list of women selected for the training and even more when I got empowered with ₦30,000,” shared Asmau, recalling it was a time when her business was struggling due to low capital and disruptions from the COVID-19 pandemic, which restricted movements and closed markets.

The micro-funding and training also transformed Christiana Emma’s life. She had lived in Tumba Ra Ngabili for 20 years and fled to Yola only when the insurgency struck. Though she lost her house and belongings, she returned after Michika was liberated because the feeling that it was her home did not leave her.

“We started rebuilding with my husband through the grace of God, and to support him, I was selling tomatoes, bananas, and oranges,” Christiana said. She would travel to Besso and Kirchinga villages in Michika and Madagali to collect goods on loan, sell them, repay the loan, and keep the profit.

“The ₦30,000 I got helped me grow my business. I later built a capital of ₦150,000 that allows me to buy goods upfront without taking loans,” she noted. “Today, the proceeds help me cover my family’s bills, from education to feeding and healthcare.”

Restoring peace through trade

In their 20-member group, 16 were Christians and 4 were Muslims. The training enlightened them on love and peaceful coexistence.

The group began holding weekly meetings every Sunday to strengthen relationships and discuss business challenges. And in one of those meetings, they decided to establish a market in Tumba Ra Ngabili.

The women approached the community chief, Lawan Yakubu, who, after consulting with his council members, approved their request and allocated land a few metres from his house for the market.

They believed the local market would make it easier to run their businesses and improve their earnings without the need to travel to nearby villages or the main Michika market. At the same time, they wanted the market to serve as a space for unity where people from all faiths could trade freely.

At first, the women traded in an open field until the Danish Refugee Council, an international humanitarian organisation, while implementing a different project in the community, learned about the market and decided to support and expand the women’s efforts by constructing a block of 16 roofed tents where traders could display their goods.

In the two years since it opened, the Tumba Ra Ngabili market has transformed both business and relationships in the community, especially with Christian and Muslim women trading side by side.

Blessing John, a widow and member of the group who now sells Gwanjo (second-hand clothes), remembers how isolated she once felt and how difficult it was to keep her business running or get help when challenges came.

“Now, I know I can turn to any member of the group, whether at the market or at home, whether a Christian or a Muslim, and get support,” said the 40-something-year-old mother of eight.

Blessing explained that to make it convenient for everyone, the women agreed that the market would mainly operate on Sundays immediately after morning church services. 

“The market also opens on Wednesdays, but Sunday has become the main trading day,” she told HumAngle.

Traders troop into the market, mostly during the harvest period, to buy bags of food crops ranging from maize, rice, beans, groundnuts, and even tomatoes, which are then transported in big lorries to Mubi, Maiduguri, and other parts of the country.

Each trader at the market pays ₦50 to the local government as tax on every market day.

Saving together

The women have also started an Adashe (savings pool) system. Every Sunday evening, after trading, they gather to repeat sessions on “maintaining peaceful coexistence with one another,” and each member contributes ₦1,000. 

The collected ₦20,000 is kept in a wooden box made by a local carpenter. The box has four keys, each held by a team of four members, and it can only be opened when all group members are present. If a member is sick or unavoidably absent, a representative from her family or relations can stand in to ensure the box can be opened.

After collecting the contributions, any member needing a loan can borrow from the pool and repay it with 10 per cent interest within a month. For example, if a member borrows ₦10,000, she will repay ₦11,000. In the early days of the system, Asmau often borrowed from the pool to strengthen her business capital.

“It helps me make more profit since the capital is much larger when I combine my initial empowerment money with the loaned amount,” Asmau said. From the profit, she buys foodstuffs each market day and contributes to the savings pool.

“I have children and pay their school fees with a part of the profit,” she added.

When no one needs a loan, the wooden box is locked and kept by the group’s treasurer, Manga Musa, who shared that the group also has a social fund, to which each member deposits ₦50 weekly.

“It’s the savings we use in case any of us gets sick. We can then support the person without asking for repayment,” she said.

And by December each year, a week before Christmas, the group gathers to share all the money in the savings pool before taking a break and returning in January for the new year. 

“We buy Christmas food and clothes for our children in December after sharing the earnings,” noted Christiana. “For Muslims, during their festive seasons, if they need to borrow money from the pool, we give it to them.”

The struggle to thrive

However, despite their success stories, some challenges raise questions about how sustainable the women’s efforts are without institutionalised support. 

During the rainy season, the market does not come alive like it does in the dry months. When HumAngle visited on a Wednesday, the tents were empty. And even on Sunday, the main market day, only a few items, such as vegetables, fruits, and small household goods, were on display. There were no food crops. 

Locals told HumAngle that this is because most traders are occupied with farming at this time of the year and do not come to the market as often.

Last year, the community suffered a flood, and most traders whose farmlands were flooded did not harvest many food crops that could be brought to the market.

Still, the poor roads leading to Tumba Ra Ngabili, along with a river that traders from distant villages must cross, also limit the amount of produce that reaches the market.

On the other hand, Blessing admitted that business has slowed in recent months. “People focus more on looking for what to eat than buying clothes,” she explained.

Manga said the women’s savings pool is directly tied to market activity. When sales drop, some members struggle to make their weekly contributions, which sometimes delays their cycle of lending and repayment.

Even with the gaps, Blessing dreams of opening a shop to stock clothes instead of pushing them around in a wheelbarrow. Others hope to see the Tumba Ra Ngabili market upgraded into a standard marketplace with proper shops and storage facilities. 

Together, the women want their savings pool to grow strong enough to sustain members and extend support to other women in the community.

Now, what remains uncertain is whether the peace they have built can withstand the challenges that still surround them.

This story was produced under the HumAngle Foundation’s Advancing Peace and Security through Journalism project, supported by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).