More than a Cookout: Black Family Reunions as Acts of Resilience

A joyful group of six people gathers around a dinner table outside, sharing laughter. The table is set with colorful dishes, under warm string lights.
Happy Black family dining together on house patio, By Alessandro Biascioli https://stock.adobe.com/images/happy-african-family-dining-together-on-house-patio/577447909?prev_url=detail

The sun is beyond blazing. It’s the middle of July somewhere deep in the South. Out in a grassy field, vibrant R&B and soul floats across the air. Barbecue smoke curls upward, mixing with bursts of laughter. Children are running around playing a game of kickball. Aunties and uncles sit at folding tables slapping down cards in a game of spades. The food is plentiful, as are the memories. Everyone around is wearing the same matching shirt, stamped with the words “Family Reunion.”

While it may look like a simple summertime gathering, the Black family reunion is more than a cookout. This cultural tradition for the Black American family has served as a living act of community and resilience. Despite being in a society that, across centuries, has fragmented Black families through enslavement, displacement, incarceration, and economic inequality, reunions reclaim that assailed unity by asserting the Black family’s right to exist, to connect, and to remember. In this way, Black family reunions stand as living demonstrations of strength, cultural preservation and human rights in action.

After the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, newly freed Black Americans began searching desperately for lost relatives. Newspaper ads, church bulletins, and Freedmen’s Bureau records overflowed with pleas for information and became one of the largest mass searches for family members in U.S. history. Some traveled hundreds of miles by foot or wagon, following rumors of where a mother had been sold or a sibling last seen. Piecing back together the fragments of kinship was one of the first exercises of freedom. Many freedpeople legalized marriages that slave codes had prohibited and that forced separations had fractured. Reunification efforts continued well beyond the Civil War. As the 20th century approached, Jim Crow policies restricted movement and opportunity, pushing Black families to develop intentional spaces of gathering. When the Great Migration (1910–1970) relocated millions of Black Americans from the rural South to industrial cities, family reunions transformed into anchors. Relatives from all over would return home to a place where members of different generations would rejoice communally. These reunions were a constant, something that served as a reminder of where home really was. This was not just an emotional gathering, but a political act as well.

Sunset over a serene marshland with reflective water channels and lush green reeds. The dramatic sky is filled with vibrant orange and purple clouds.
Sunset with low country marsh, By Nate.Rosso https://stock.adobe.com/images/sunset-with-low-country-marsh/518862457?prev_url=detail

At a time when so much of the Black identity has been commodified and misrepresented, family gatherings serve as spaces of self-definition. Elders share stories that are intricately woven together like a quilt, tying together generations. These are stories you don’t read in history books. Tales of migration, of how a family land plot was held after Reconstruction, of the relatives who raised children not their own, or of how names were passed down to honor those who came before. Many Black Americans lack physical documents of our ancestors, so relying on these stories is important. The family trees and cultural roots live in people. Recipes passed down from grandma, learning hand games from your older cousin, being taught how to braid– all are acts of remembrance. They are living archives where history, memory, and joy coexist, especially when you think about how much love went into the plate you eat from, or what lengths each member went to to get here. Psychologists have spoken about intergenerational resilience, the passing down of coping strategies, identity, and heritage through shared rituals and traditions. For Black families, reunions are a major mechanism of psychological and cultural healing. Despite slavery, despite Jim Crow, despite mass incarceration, despite poverty, the kinship ties hold strong.

A joyful scene of a young girl with a red bow in her hair, surrounded by three women helping her adjust it. A warm, family atmosphere is evident.
Three generations of women on a sofa, Photo by RDNE Stock project from Pexels: https://www.pexels.com/photo/three-generation-on-sofa-7951664/

Serving as living testaments of endurance, the Black family reunion embodies what the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Article 16 identifies the family as the “natural and fundamental group unit of society.” The UDHR affirms that this unit is entitled to protection. For centuries Black Americans have had to build that unit from the ground up. In a society that has conjured every act imaginable to fracture kinship, the act of reuniting has become a radical reclamation of humanity. It protects the right to family, the right to culture, and the right to dignity. Beyond the UDHR, The UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2001) emphasizes communities’ rights to preserve and transmit cultural practices. Reunions do this naturally, serving as places where Black cultural heritage is passed not only through words but through food, music, tradition, and presence. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Article 23, which the United States has ratified, states: “The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.” Black family reunions exemplify this right, even when institutions have failed to protect Black families throughout history. From a human rights lens, it’s not simply a tradition. It is a site of cultural and familial rights being lived out, preserved, and protected.

Like all long-held traditions, family reunions now face modern challenges. Gentrification has reshaped many historically Black neighborhoods, erasing the physical landmarks that once grounded families. This leaves some families’ home anchor that held their ancestors together financially inaccessible or gone entirely. Younger generations are feeling more disconnected from their family’s roots or are unaware of their heritage. Rising travel costs, inflexible work schedules, and economic pressures make it harder for families to gather in person. Yet, Black families continue to adapt. Technology has helped foster new methods of connection. Photo albums shared through online drives, online fundraisers to help cover costs, family group-chats, Zoom calls, and much more all work to bring families together across distance. These digital tools have helped make it possible for families to reunite, no matter the circumstance. Whether under a tent in someone’s backyard or through the screen of a laptop, the message remains the same: we are still here.

A joyful family of four walks hand in hand through a grassy field. The girl holds a colorful kite, expressing happiness and togetherness in a natural setting.
Black family laughing and flying a kite while running together outdoors. By Drobot Dean https://stock.adobe.com/images/black-family-laughing-and-flying-kite-while-running-together/474942304?prev_url=detail

Protecting the right to family is not just a matter of law, but legacy. Reunions show that when institutions fail to preserve connection, communities find their own way. The family reunion reminds us that human rights are not abstract ideals; they are lived through various experiences. As long as the smoke of the grill rises and laughter fills the air, the legacy of resilience lives on. Because even in the face of adversity, Black joy endures.

When Misogyny Goes Viral: The Digital Roots of Modern Sexism

A hooded figure sits in front of a laptop in a dark environment, backlit by faint, vertical code lines. The mood is mysterious and ominous.
ZAY WIN HTAI. (n.d.). Anonymous hacker without face typing computer laptop. Concept of hacking cybersecurity, cybercrime, cyberattack, etc. Adobe Stock Images. https://stock.adobe.com/images/anonymous-hacker-without-face-typing-computer-laptop-concept-of-hacking-cybersecurity-cybercrime-cyberattack-etc/574955036

In the depths of the internet, a movement has quietly gained momentum. One that masks hostility toward women behind the guise of self-improvement and male empowerment. Known as the manosphere, this digital community includes online forums, podcasts, and influencers who promote “red-pilled” ideologies that reject feminism, question gender equality, and glorify dominance as a marker of masculinity. Though it began on obscure corners of the web, it has since widely spread into mainstream culture, shaping social attitudes, influencing algorithms, and redefining how millions of men see themselves and the women around them.

The 1999 film The Matrix featured the “red pill”, which has since become an ideology people use to describe their awakening to some previously hidden reality. Many male supremacist movements of today use this to describe their “realization” that men don’t systematically hold any power or privilege. Instead, they now know the “truth” that socially, economically, and sexually men are at the whims of women’s power. Around 2016, misogynist forums began to shift from a Red Pill to a Black Pill mentality. This belief system believes that looks are genetically determined, and that women choose sexual partners based solely on physical features, so whether a person will be in involuntary celibate or “incel” is predetermined. These ideologies have also become synonymous and adopted by far-right and white supremacist groups to describe their own versions of awakenings, whose worldviews often overlaps with male supremacist positions, such as antifeminism. The rise of the manosphere illustrates how digital platforms can undermine the broader project of equality in modern society.

To understand the manosphere’s rise, it is important to recognize the social insecurities that fuel it. Many young men today face economic instability, social isolation, and identity confusion. For some, manosphere spaces offer a sense of belonging and control in response to these insecurities. It’s done so by often framing men as victims of feminism, arguing that modern society has stripped them of purpose and authority. The American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry has noted that online radicalism often begins with loneliness, frustration, or a search for community. The anonymity of the internet makes engagement seem less risky. The manosphere is no different than any other extremist movements in the sense that it provides validation for personal grievances while redirecting that frustration toward a scapegoat. The problem is that what begins as self-improvement or dating advice often escalates into hostility toward women. Influencers whose entire branding is built around themselves being an “alpha male” teach followers that emotional vulnerability is weakness and that dominance is proof of worth. This toxic masculinity promotes emotional suppression and gendered resentment. What is masked as being something meant to empower men is wrecking their mental health. Now they find themselves in spaces where misogyny thrives, leaving them less equipped, not more, to engage in healthy relationships.

The manosphere’s rapid spread cannot be explained by ideology alone, it’s also driven by digital platforms themselves. Social media algorithms are designed to maximize engagement, and content that provokes outrage tends to keep users scrolling longer. This has made misogyny not only visible but profitable. Research from the Center for Countering Digital Hate found that Andrew Tate’s videos were viewed over 54 million times on YouTube alone, despite his content being banned for promoting violence against women. Even after content moderation efforts, snippets of his interviews and quotes reappear through fan accounts, keeping his ideology in constant circulation. Similarly, YouTube’s recommendation system has been shown to guide users toward this kind of content once they interact with one video in the genre. This isn’t purely accidental, but rather the outcome of algorithmic bias that rewards engagement over ethics. Outrage, anger, and fear generate clicks, comments, and ad revenue. The same platforms that are used to connect people have built ecosystems that reward division.

Five people sitting on the floor, using laptops and tablets. They wear casual, colorful clothing, and their legs are crossed. Relaxed and collaborative mood.
Students with modern devices studying online indoors- Pixel-Shot, https://stock.adobe.com/images/students-with-modern-devices-studying-online-indoors/388684331

As you would probably figure, these ideas do not stay confined to screens. They spill into classrooms, workplaces, and politics. Educators have reported a noticeable rise in students, particularly boys, echoing red-pilled talking points, and engaging in misogynistic content. Young audiences become desensitized to the harm caused by gender discrimination. Manosphere language has also seeped into mainstream culture. Phrases like “high-value man,” “body count,” and “female nature” have entered everyday online conversations, often used to justify double standards or demean women’s autonomy. Podcasts, dating coaches, and influencers now preach the same narratives once confined to obscure message boards. This is proof of how digital misogyny has gone mainstream. Some women have also jumped on the bandwagon with trends such as the “trad wife” that revolve around women playing traditional roles within the home. Women have the choice to do so as they wish, but often times these women speak negatively of feminism and shame others who don’t share their beliefs. Political commentator Candace Owens has a book releasing in November of this year titled Make Him a Sandwich: Why Real Women Don’t Need Fake Feminism. She says we should destroy the feminist movement due to its toxicity that it imposes on other women. More concerningly, research from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue links online misogyny to real-world violence, including gender-based harassment and extremist acts. The 2018 Toronto van attack that killed 11 people and injured another 14, for example, was carried out by a man who identified with the incel community. His online activity revealed years of radicalization through misogynistic spaces that glorified violence against women. Digital radicalization is not an abstract issue, it poses a tangible threat to public safety, gender equality, and civic discourse.

Misogyny, whether online or offline, is fundamentally a human rights issue. It infringes upon women’s rights to safety, dignity, and participation in public life. Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that all people are entitled to rights “without distinction of any kind, such as sex.” When misogynistic ideologies are monetized and spread unchecked, they compromise that promise by turning online spaces into spaces where hostility and exclusion can thrive. UN Women and The Commission on the Status of Women has warned that technology-facilitated gender-based violence “results in or is likely to result in physical, sexual, psychological, social, political, or economic harm, or other infringements of rights and freedoms.” Despite these warnings, few countries have comprehensive frameworks addressing gendered hate speech online. In the United States, content moderation is left to the discretion of the company. Ensuring equality in the digital age requires that online platforms uphold the same human rights standards expected in other public spheres. Stronger moderation policies and support for digital literacy programs could help to counter the spread of misogynistic content.

A diverse group of women marches confidently outdoors. The leader holds a cardboard sign reading "WOMEN," while others follow with determined expressions.
Group of feminist women have protest for their rights outdoors. Source: standret, https://stock.adobe.com/images/somebody-has-to-make-move-group-of-feminist-women-have-protest-for-their-rights-outdoors/296292933

The manosphere’s rise reveals a deeper truth about the internet: technology is never neutral. The same tools that connect us can also divide, radicalize, and dehumanize. Allowing misogyny to thrive online is not just a cultural issue, it is a moral one that erodes human rights principles at their core. As users of these social media platforms, we must challenge misogynistic rhetoric when we see it. From a human rights standpoint, more media literacy should be taught within schools, and governments must enforce accountability standards that prioritize safety over profit. If we want a society that values both freedom and fairness, we need to ensure that the technology we use serve those ideals—not undermine them.

Democracy for Sale: Big Tech’s Silent Takeover

Democracy for Sale: Big Tech’s Silent Takeover

 
KhunKorn Studio. (n.d.). Hand human finger touch cyborg robot white 3d rendering. Adobe Stock Images. https://stock.adobe.com/images/hand-human-finger-touch-cyborg-robot-white-3d-rendering/572824180

In today’s world, technology is more prevalent than ever, shaping nearly every aspect of daily life. Much of this influence can be traced back to a small group of companies known as the Magnificent Seven. Meta, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet (Google), Nvidia, and Tesla dominate the market, drive economic growth, and lead major tech trends.  These companies have a major concentration of market power in fields such as artificial intelligence, social media, e-commerce, and digital infrastructure. Apple dominates consumer tech, Amazon controls nearly 40% of the U.S. e-commerce market, and Meta owns three of the world’s largest social platforms. This gives them immense influence over both the economy and society at large. With everything in the palm of their hands, there have been concerns raised over data privacy, misinformation, and anti-competitiveness, exemplified by issues such as the Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data breach and Amazon’s AI hiring bias scandal. As users of these services, we are often forced to accept practices that negatively affect our personal rights. These practices affect basic human rights stated in articles 12 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Privacy is compromised through data tracking, expression is influenced by algorithmic bias, and consumer choice is reduced by monopolistic control.

Article 21 of the UDHR states that “Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.” This includes the right to access information. The U.S. reflects this principle through the Freedom of Information Act, which ensures transparency in public service. When these private corporations control the flow of that information, they compromise the transparency that people have a right to. By controlling things such as search results and advertising, big tech influences the information that citizens see, which can impact public opinion.

The American flag waving in front of a classical building with tall, ornate columns, conveying a sense of patriotism and grandeur.
Nomad_Soul. (n.d.). Washington DC Monuments with USA. Adobe Stock Images. https://stock.adobe.com/images/washington-dc-monuments-with-usa/143177910

In 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice filed lawsuits against Apple, Amazon, Meta, and Google, alleging that they built illegal monopolies that harm consumers and suppress innovation. This resulted in an August 2024 U.S. court ruling that Google did maintain an illegal monopoly on online search and a second trial ruling in April 2025 that they had a monopoly in online advertising. One of the main arguments in these cases was Google’s relationship with Apple. Google has claimed that making its search engine the default choice on Apple devices doesn’t restrict consumer choice, since users are technically free to switch. However, the fact that Google paid Apple $18 billion in 2021 alone to remain the default search engine suggests otherwise. This appears to be a classic example of anti-competitive behavior, where companies will use tactics like buying out smaller rivals or using exclusivity contracts. These methods ensure that once these companies dominate a market, they make it nearly impossible for rivals to challenge them.

Through the usage of acquisitions, restrictive contracts, and financial power, companies are able to secure that domination. In the e-commerce market, Independent sellers who rely on Amazon’s platform are often faced with strict controls that limit their autonomy. This behavior has not gone unnoticed. Amazon’s trial is set for October 2026, and the outcome could reshape not only Amazon’s operations but the future of online retail.

Today’s concerns about tech giants mirror debates from the late 19th century. During the Gilded Age, trusts like Standard Oil used their financial power to buy out competitors, corner markets, and control prices. These practices eventually led to the Sherman Antitrust Act and landmark antitrust rulings that sought to restore competition. While researching this topic, I found myself making comparisons more than once. These digital monopolies resemble industrial trusts. Like Standard Oil, they leverage size and resources to dominate markets, eliminate competition, and limit consumer choice. From a human rights standpoint, there should be more urgency of applying antitrust principles to modern technology.

Close-up of hands using a smartphone in a dimly lit setting. The focus is on the screen and fingers, with blurred lights in the background, suggesting nighttime.
Syda Productions. (n.d.). Business, Technology and People concept – Close up of businesswoman hands with smartphone. Adobe Stock Images. https://stock.adobe.com/images/business-technology-and-people-concept-close-up-of-businesswoman-hands-with-smartphone/223178955

The problem goes beyond markets. Just how Standard Oil shaped politics back then, today’s tech giants extend beyond their businesses and into the functions of government itself. Some sectors of governments outsource aspects of their work to private tech firms, blurring the line between corporate power and public authority. For example, police forces hire private hacking firms to gain access to devices. When unelected corporations wield this kind of power, accountability shifts from government officials to CEOs and shareholders. Democracy is dependent upon government responsibility and honesty, and when this is compromised, the power of the citizens is taken away.

Some companies use private technology to process data or discriminate unintentionally through algorithms. The spread of misinformation and propaganda has been given space to thrive on platforms like Facebook and YouTube. Harmful rhetoric often spreads unchecked, while some political content is selectively censored by being removed or restricting accounts. Users are exposed to unchecked information that threatens informed civic engagement. For example, during the 2020 Covid 19 pandemic, misinformation, election conspiracy theories, and anti-vaccine propaganda was rampant on social media platforms.

Four women protest holding "Love" and "Peace" signs with peace symbols. They stand united, some with fists raised, in front of a historic building.
Cultura Creative. (n.d.). Activists holding peace signs protesting in street. Adobe Stock Images. https://stock.adobe.com/images/activists-holding-peace-signs-protesting-in-street/481480070

To protect human rights, there need to be accountability mechanisms and transparency requirements for digital platforms similar to those imposed on industries like food, medicine, and automobiles. Overseas, the European Union’s Digital Services Act now requires large tech platforms to disclose how their algorithms recommend content and to remove harmful misinformation quickly. This could be a potential approach that could serve as a model for U.S. regulators. Protecting democracy in this new digital age also requires a human rights stance. When companies control markets, digital infrastructure and the flow of information, they hold control over citizens’ freedom to choose. The rise of the Magnificent Seven has fueled incredible technological innovation, but their dominance is increasingly monopolistic in nature. Consumers deserve a market that rewards innovation, protects privacy, and ensures real choice. Addressing these challenges requires both awareness and advocacy. As citizens, we can push for stronger digital privacy laws and hold elected officials accountable for enforcing antitrust and transparency standards. We could also support open-source alternatives to big tech platforms. Technology is meant to serve the people, not the other way around. The history of antitrust regulation shows that concentrated corporate power can be challenged, and, for the sake of democracy and human rights, it must be.