Boston celebrates International Women's Day with Women's March across the city
"Today is the mission to bring women together to show them that we are the ones that are going to stand up," Organizer Ashley Parys said.
Several organizations participated in the rally and march, which voiced their concerns about women's rights, healthcare, immigration, Black Lives Matter, Ukraine, and the LGBTQ+ community.
Many of the comments and criticisms were directed at President Donald Trump's policies and Elon Musk. As part of the rally, protesters marched on the Boston Common, down Commonwealth Avenue, and up Boylston Street. They also made a pit stop at the Tesla store in the Prudential Center to express their opinions.
"It's not just about us being loud and in big numbers; it's about what we are going to do every single day after this," Parys said.
More than 2000 people participated in today's march, but they know this is just the first step, and more action is needed.
"Next steps for us to get active in our communities and lift each other up and to speak out. And let our politicians know; email your politicians. It's very easy to do. House.gov, Senate.gov it takes less than five minutes," North Shore resident Shannon Parolisi said.
The march was peaceful, and there were no counter-protestors.
International Women's Day celebrated
Women around the world participated in demonstrations on Saturday. The day marks a call to action to raise awareness of issues that women everywhere face, such as equal pay, reproductive rights, gender-based violence, and more.
The day was officially recognized in 1977 by the United Nations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Talks held over making Trump first US president to be given Freedom of the City of London
Talks have been held over giving Donald Trump the Freedom of the City of London during his state visit in September, in a highly symbolic move. According to a source, the proposal to give President Trump the honour was made because it would give the Corporation the opportunity to meet the US leader and make the case for free trade and against tariffs at the ceremony. It would also be a way of marking the UK receiving the first of the Trump trade deals with questions still over tariffs on steel. The president would helicopter in from Windsor Castle to the US ambassador's Winfield House residence in Regent's Park for the ceremony. The Independent was told: 'It would be an important honour for the president just as our countries prepare to mark the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence next year. 'More importantly it would be the perfect opportunity for the City to address the importance of free trade and the issues of tariffs. 'The symbolism of being allowed to herd your sheep across the bridge and not pay taxes is very important all things considered.' But while the president was understood to be keen on the idea of receiving the honour, the Freedom Applications Sub (Policy & Resources) Committee chaired by Sir William Russell, half brother of the actor Damian Lewis, has not been persuaded. According to sources the sub committee was warned that the award would be 'too controversial'. The Corporation rarely gives government leaders the honour and had to withdraw it from Myanmar'ss Aung San Suu Kyi after criticism of her government being involved with persecution of the Rohingya. However, the official explanation is that President Trump has not been in government long enough. A spokesperson said: 'By convention, only Heads of State or Government who have served a minimum of seven years in office are eligible to be considered for the Honorary Freedom. 'The decision to grant the Honorary Freedom rests solely with the Court of Common Council – our highest decision-making body – not with any individual elected member.' The last head of government to be awarded the Honorary Freedom was Baroness Margaret Thatcher, who was recognised after serving 10 years as prime minister. The Honorary Freedom has never been awarded to a sitting US president, although Dwight Eisenhower received it after the Second World War for his role as commander in chief of the allied forces. According to a source, the City may change its mind if there is a request from the government which has not been made yet. It means that the US president is facing a second snub in his state visit. It follows a decision not to ask him to address a joint sitting of the Houses of Parliament with the state visit happening the day after parliament rises for the conference season recess. This is despite the fact that when Pope Benedict came on a state visit in 2010 he was given the honour of addressing Parliamentarians in Westminster Hall even though it was the day after recess had begun. Trump's state visit - the first time an individual has been granted a second state visit - will take place between 17 and 19 September. It will include a state banquet hosted by the King with the president staying at Windsor Castle.
Bloomberg
21 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Canada Weighs Retaliation Cost as Analysts Warn Hitting Back Isn't Worth It
Canada's decision to retaliate against US tariffs earlier this year appears to be driving a divergence in how President Donald Trump is dealing with America's neighbors. Until this week, Canada and Mexico received similar treatment in White House trade actions. Each was subject to a 25% base tariff, with a large exemption for goods shipped under the North American free trade pact known as USMCA.
Forbes
21 minutes ago
- Forbes
HOW TRUMP'S TARIFFS THREATEN ITALY'S BELOVED WINES
Nobody wanted a trade war, but the price to avoid it is too high anyway. For everybody. The recent agreement reached by European Commission President Ursula van der Leyen and the US President Donald Trump has halved the proposed 30% tariffs on all European products, but it leaves a bitter taste in the mouths of all European manufacturers. For Italy the U.S. remains the single largest export market, accounting for 24% of its total export value in wine. In 2024, the annual turnover of Italian wine exports was approximately $9.15 billion. Once the agreement was announced, reactions were not long in Dissatisfaction Of The Wine Producers And The Minister's Concern According to the secretary general of Unione Italiana Vini Paolo Castelletti, even if a 15% tariff is lower than the proposed 30%, this kind of deal cannot be satisfying for anybody because it's extremely higher than the pre-tariff rate, which was almost zero. For a country like Italy, which prioritizes value for money, this is a devastating blow. The president of Consorzio Tutela Vini Valpolicella Christian Marchesini is of the same opinion. "Any duty or barrier on wine trade causes extremely significant damage to the European and Italian wine industry and to Valpolicella as well – claimed Marchesini - Pending the final negotiations, the 15% duty projected in the medium and long term would have a very serious economic impact. At present, we can say that, according to today's leaks, the uncertainty that will affect us until next autumn is just as serious." The Italian Minister of Agriculture Francesco Lollobrigida has always shown optimism about the deal, but now he admits: 'Wine is what concerns us most.' Meanwhile, the deadline of the 1st of August, when the tariffs should have been effective, has been delayed up to the 7th, although the 15% remains. Tariffs and Dollar Weakness Are A Dangerous Combination Recent studies by Confindustria, the main association representing Italian manufacturing and service companies, show that imposing US 15% tariffs on all Italian goods imported in America could cause Italy to lose €22.6 billion in exports (approximately $24.6 billion). The wine sector only would lose $520 million. The tariffs are not the only obstacle however, the dollar devaluation also complicates things. These two factors combined can make Italian wines less competitive than others in the US markets. Unione Italiana Vini (UIV), the Italian wine companies association, has recently raised the alarm: 15% tariffs penalize at least 80% of the sector. If in January 2025 (pre-tariff) the markup from the winery to the retailer was 123%, with the new tariff regime soars to 186%. As a result, American consumers ultimately pay almost twice the tariff rate in increased prices due to the compounding markup structure throughout the distribution chain. Not All The Wines Are Created Equal The Italian wines most affected by the new tariffs are those with the highest US market exposure: Moscato d'Asti from Piedmont (60% export) and red wines from this region (31%), Pinot Grigio (48%), Chianti Classico (46%) and other Tuscan DOC reds (35%), Prosecco (27%). Overall the new tariff regime will mostly affect the most popular wines, which are affordable to almost every pocket, more than the premium ones. Wines such as Brunello di Montalcino, Barolo, Amarone della Valpolicella, and Super Tuscans are already expensive to begin with, and therefore intended for high-spending consumers. Indeed, in this case, a bottle that was pre-tariffed and cost $25 ex-cellar, $55.75 on the retail shelf, and $150.00 at the restaurant, would now cost $71.50 in the wine shop and $195.00 at the restaurant. If you're a rich person, spending an extra $45 on an excellent Italian wine won't break the bank. Who Wins And Who Loses What has been reported so far are estimates data on behalf Italian wine producers. But what about their overseas trading partners? According to the UIV president Lamberto Frescobaldi, they and their customers could be the ones who will lose the most: 'The tariffs will not only affect consumption, but will also have a severe impact on the US economy, with total damages amounting to $25 billion' he said. This estimate was calculated by the UIV Observatory and is based on the direct, indirect, and induced impact of all wine in the US in the distribution, retail, and transportation phases alone. Wine America quantified this impact at $144.4 billion in its 'United States 2025 Economic Impact Study.' This figure includes not only sales revenues but also the value generated along the distribution chain, the positive effects of wages and the resulting purchasing power, and the increase in demand for goods and services in other related sectors. A significant effect, but one that would lose $25 billion with tariffs on wines at 15%. And things could even get worse: if nothing changes, the revenue loss could reach almost $1.7 billion in the next 12 months. At the time this article was written, there had not been a joint final statement yet, and the details of the deal remain unclear and subject to ratification. In short, the uncertainty keeps on reigning supreme. However, this can mean that perhaps there is still room for further negotiations. Any manufacturer in Europe is crossing their fingers and hoping for the best. With the current deal, it seems that the EU and the US have avoided a trade war, but despite the appearance, the price they could pay is significant for both.
