In April 1961, about 1,500 Cuban exiles trained and backed by the CIA set out to invade and overthrow the Fidel Castro regime. The Bay of Pigs operation, as it has since become notoriously known, was, of course, an unmitigated disaster—those exiles who weren't killed by well-prepared pro-Castro forces were rounded up and imprisoned until the Kennedy Administration was able to negotiate their release. The fiasco not only helped lay the groundwork for the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 but generally made the United States look like shit.

The mess of a CIA operation had long-term consequences for the organized crime scene back in the United States, too. Among those members of Brigade 2506—the would-be-liberators of Cuba—released back to American custody in 1962 was José Miguel Battle, Sr., a former Havana cop. He went on to reinvent himself in the US as El Padrino, a "Godfather" of the Cuban-American Mafia. Thanks in part to his connections to both legendary Italian mafiosi and the Havana underworld, he became a sort of king of the numbers racket in the New York/New Jersey metro area. With criminal interests all along the Eastern seaboard, Battle’s run continued into the George W. Bush era, when he and his son were finally arrested in 2004. Numbers, murder, and drugs—El Padrino seemed to outlast politics itself in a ruthless bid for power and riches.

In his new book, The Corporation: An Epic Story of the Cuban American Underworld, out March 20, the master of true crime TJ English explores the life of the Cuban mob boss who, the author concluded, consciously modeled himself on Marlon Brando’s Vito Corleone as he got older. VICE caught up with English about his new book and where El Padrino ranks in the chronicles of gangster lore. Here’s what he had to say.

VICE: What do you think José Miguel Battle learned as a vice cop in Havana that would help him head a criminal empire in the United States?
He learned how corruption works and how the world operates. How organized crime is a conduit between the upper world (the business and political class) and the underworld (the criminals and gangsters). Battle delivered the skim from the casinos to the presidential palace. He was the go-between, the bagman between Meyer Lanksy and President Fulgencio Batista and his government. Battle really understood how you needed to take care of people within the system. Payment would be made to whoever needed.

When he got to the United States and wanted to set up this gambling empire revolving around a numbers racket, or what Latinos called “bolita,” he knew if it was properly organized, it could be a goldmine. Part of organizing it was making sure he cleared it with the necessary Mafia figures in the United States. He set up meetings, through Santo Trafficante, with all the key Mafia figures in the New York/New Jersey area and started this bolita enterprise, which was quite vast and profitable on many levels.

It's remarkable that the failed Bay of Pigs invasion seemed to ultimately bring together the men who would become the Cuban Mafia in America. But given the way things were run in Batista's Cuba, it's not exactly shocking, right?
A lot of the Mafia figures and Cubans who were displaced by the revolution were angry. They had lost money, property, and belongings, had been unceremoniously kicked out of the country, and wanted to take Cuba back. They had a mutual interest with the CIA and the US government, who saw the Communist government of Fidel Castro as a threat, and wanted to overthrow it. All these elements—the Mafia, the CIA, and the Cuban exiles—formed a coalition and became determined to kill Castro and take back Cuba. The biggest initiative in that effort was the Bay of Pigs invasion. The men from this botched invasion, including Battle, became the foundation of The Corporation.

A lot of Americans' frame of reference for Cuban gangsters is probably still Brian De Palma’s Scarface, which emphasizes the Mariel boatlift of Cubans into Florida. How did Al Pacino's Tony Montana compare to the real man they called El Padrino?
José Miguel Battle was more of an establishment figure, the guy with lots of connections in the upper world. Tony Montana was a refugee, a guy with nothing, from the lowest level of the gutter who rose up. El Padrino was much more of an old-school don, because of his understanding of how the system worked. But the Mariel boatlift did have an impact on The Corporation. When they arrived in New Jersey and Miami, they were immediately integrated into the criminal underworld, and they were the kinda guys who would do the type of criminal assignments that other people might not be willing to do. Murders, all kinds of hard-line criminal activities. Some of the most violent criminal activity was done by the Marielitos, as they were called.

Like plenty of real-life and fictional mob figures, El Padrino didn’t exactly take kindly to betrayals. But the incident with his one-time protege Ernesto Torres—whom he is said to have ordered killed—was the closest he came to hard time in prison before he actually got nabbed in 2004, right?
Ernesto Torres was known to the organization as El Hijo Prodigo, the prodigal son. He was this young kid, 19-years-old, who showed talent as a gangster and as a killer. He started out pretty much as a hitman: One of his first missions was to try to avenge the murder of Battle's brother. Battle saw him as someone he could mentor and shape, maybe even to take over the organization. Others in the organization couldn't quite understand it, because this guy Torres wasn't very bright and didn't seem like the kind of guy who would make a good leader. Ernesto was always broke. He started kidnapping other bankers in the organization, and holding them for ransom money.

Eventually, Torres did the unthinkable and shot one of the kidnapped bankers. The guy survived, but Torres almost killed him. The other bankers told Battle that he had to do something about it because this guy was a loose cannon.

[After Torres's death], Battle was put on trial for conspiracy and found guilty on one of the counts. It looked like he was going to be put away for a long time—his reign was over. Torres's girlfriend had testified against him, but Battle beat that charge on a technicality. He got a lighter sentence. When there was some belief that he would be tried again using the girlfriend as a witness, the organization took care of that situation by murdering her before that trial could ever take place.

El Padrino was eventually brought down due to the dogged pursuit of one law enforcement official—David Shanks—whom you had access to. Why do you think he made bringing down this mafioso his career?
David Shanks was just a Miami cop who came into the story of The Corporation kind of late. By the time he was involved, Battle had moved from New Jersey down to Miami, and the Corporation had been up and running for a least 15 years or 20 years in the New York area, and was now moving its operations. David Shanks was the guy who had worked organized crime, particularly street gambling and money laundering. He's one of the guys who first comprehended, I think, the full scope of what the Corporation was all about. He did a lot of it through tracking the money and how the money was being laundered by a kind of a check-cashing scheme, and he had connected that money-laundering scheme to the organization itself. He investigated them for about 20 years.

How do stories that teeter in the grey areas of politics and crime, like the ones you are so inclined to write, reflect on what’s going on today in that arena in our country?
If you don't understand the history and the workings or organized crime in America, you can't understand America. That's how intertwined they are, and always have been, and still are. We talk often about how the mafia diminished and all that, and, of course, it has. But I don't think the corrupt mandate that created organized crime has diminished at all. It just keep taking on new forms and new shapes depending on what the dominant racket is in any given era at any given time. At one time it was illegal booze. Then it was sort of labor racketeering, and then it was narcotics. Any number of things. Political corruption and law enforcement corruption is always part and parcel to what makes the world go around. I don't think that's changed much.

This interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity. Learn more about English's new book, which drops Tuesday, here.

Follow Seth Ferranti on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

Rick and Morty co-creator Dan Harmon confirmed in a Friday tweet that he hasn't been writing new episodes for Adult Swim's most popular show in part because the network hasn't ordered any yet.

"It can be challenging... to write a show that hasn’t been ordered by a network," he wrote in response to one of many belligerent tweets about the fate of the fourth season.

The show already warned viewers that season four likely wouldn't be ready for "a really long time," and one Rick and Morty writer said we'd probably have to wait until 2019. The writer, Ryan Ridley, also suggested that the 18-month gap between season two and season three was because Harmon, co-creator Justin Roiland, and Adult Swim "didn't get their shit together."

For his part, Harmon said that season three took forever because he didn't want it to be worse than seasons one and two. But this time around, it seems like he's anxiously waiting for Adult Swim to renew the show just like the rest of us.

VICE reached out to Adult Swim for comment and will update this story accordingly. If the Turner-owned TV network isn't interested in making more episodes of Rick and Morty, fans have an idea for what Harmon and Roiland could do about it:

With the show in limbo, Rick and Morty have popped up at Deadmau5 shows and in a Run the Jewels music video, but we're really hopping the last time we see the iconic duo won't be in some rapper's album announcement.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Beckett Mufson on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

Not to be outdone by Ontario Cannabis Stores’ underwhelming logo, Health Canada has revealed what packaging for legal weed will likely look like and it’s just as dull.

In a report released Monday, the government outlined the strict regulations for how it wants weed to be packaged and sold for the masses. The proposed regulations stipulate that cannabis be sold in white packaging, with a bright red stop-sign graphic featuring a cannabis leaf symbol and “THC,” along with a bright yellow health warning. In a nutshell, packaged weed here has a very good chance of looking like trail mix that may contain bleach.

According to the report each package should say, “KEEP OUT OF THE REACH OF CHILDREN” but the warnings don’t end there. Here are some examples of the alleged health risks Health Canada wants to slap on legal weed.

WARNING: Do not drive or operate machinery after using cannabis. More than 4,000 Canadians were injured and 75 died from driving after using cannabis (in 2012).

WARNING: Cannabis can be addictive. Up to 1 in 2 people who use cannabis daily will become addicted.

WARNING: Regular use of cannabis can increase the risk of psychosis and schizophrenia. Higher THC content can increase the risk of psychosis and schizophrenia.

In a media briefing Monday, Eric Costen, Director General of the federal government’s Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Secretariat, said the warnings are based on “an exhaustive review of all the available scientific research on cannabis.”

Images and graphics other than the brand logo will be banned and everything right down to font size will be regulated, making the regulations even stricter than those in place for tobacco and alcohol. The packages will need to be opaque and child-resistant.

The cannabis packaging will also need to contain a host of information including potency, weight, packaging date, and number of units or doses.

The Cannabis Act has been approved by the House of Commons and is currently under Senate review, which means you should be able to buy recreational weed legally by sometime late summer.

Currently medical cannabis producers are not subject to many packaging/labelling restrictions. They will have six months to adopt the new marketing recommendations once they are passed into law.

Who’s excited for legalization, baby!

Follow Manisha Krishnan on Twitter.

Halfway through dinner, I realize she’s drunk.

We’re dining a la fresco over plates of coho salmon and glasses of red wine. It’s one of those gloriously warm Northern evenings where the sun—which never sets this time of year—hangs bright and clear in the west and everything takes on a soft, sepia-tinted glow. The restaurant sits next to the Chena River,* which runs brown and lazy beside us, full of ducks and gulls. It’s basically maximum level romantic for Fairbanks, Alaska.

Except that my date, Alice, is half in the bag.

I thought I smelled alcohol on her breath when I got in the car with her, but I dismissed it; we’d been together most of the day—when the hell would she have had time to get drunk? She accidentally answers my unspoken question when she reaches for her phone and carelessly leaves the top part of her bag open—I can see a Gatorade bottle amid a handful of papers, three-quarters full of a golden liquid that is obviously not an electrolyte-replacing sports drink.

I think about the bottle of Jack Daniels on the counter in her kitchen.

I take a sip of wine and try to process the fact that she has been ghost-drinking in the bathroom like a teenager at a school dance, probably all day. It explains a lot. In the last few hours, Alice has:

• Made disparaging remarks about homeless and First Nations people
• Continuously offered me backhanded, aggressive compliments that I’m pretty sure qualify as “negging”
• Talked non-stop about everyone she has ever dated, fucked, eye-banged or had a wet dream about
• Is presently engaged in the middle of an elaborate retelling of how her first true love was an underage, 17 year-old girl she met while she—substantially older—was her high school volleyball coach.

Lesbian Dating Tip # 1: NO. For the love of god, NO. To all of it but especially the last one.

I am, in short, completely miserable.

Alice and I met on Tinder. I live in Whitehorse, Yukon, where there is an active but extremely small lesbian community, many of whom are older or already in relationships. Dating here is hard—honestly, I’d have better luck sticking my head out my window and shouting “ any ladies want a piece of this?” than trying to actively and meaningfully date up here. Which is why, even though Alice lived in Fairbanks, roughly 1000 kilometres away, I still swiped right on her.

I was fresh out of a terrible break up with my girlfriend of two years, an affair that had—literally—ended with her shouting, “It’s not cheating if I tell you about it!” and getting on a plane to Peru. I wasn’t looking for anything serious—just something light and easy to take my mind off the hurt.

On-screen, Alice was an ideal candidate—charming, witty, kind, herself in an open long-distance relationship. I was really open about where I was with Alice, but even as she said she understood, she came on hard right out of the gate. Soon we were texting and talking on Messenger for several hours a day.

Even across a time zone, we had chemistry. I’ve done a lot of courting but had never myself been courted; I was flattered and smitten. She sent me sweet good morning messages. She encouraged me and took an interest in my work as a writer. She talked about Rupi Kaur. When I told her I was worried about how quickly our emotional relationship was moving, that I wasn’t ready for anything as intense as I felt this was getting, she quoted Charles Bukowski to me —“I want to whole world or nothing,” from Post Office — as a way of driving her point home. It would all be worth it, she said, if we could find love together.

Later, it would turn out she hasn’t actually read any Bukowski, but seen his quotes on Instagram memes. She wasn’t even aware he was a writer. To this day, I am still suspicious of anyone who claims Kaur as their favorite poet.

This went on for two months. She invited me stay with her for a week at her house in the city.

So, I hopped into my car and drove the 13-some hours to Fairbanks. The weather was warm and the sky was clear. It was June, the North was in the full throws of summer, and I was on my way to meet a woman I was crazy for and believed was crazy about me too. It was one of the happiest drives of my life.

And now, here I am. Listening to this drunken faux bourgeois tell me about sneaking into her under-aged paramour’s house through a basement window to fuck her and having her parents come home part-way through. She had to hide in a closet and pray they wouldn’t hear her, like in some bad teen comedy. But it’s totally OK now, she says. Her parents were very supportive, once they found out and had calmed down and decided not to call the police.

There’s a pause in the conversation. I can see she is waiting, with the baited, childish impatience of the drunken confessor, for me to approve.

I ask her how old this girl would be now, which is actually me asking covertly how long ago this all was.

“Oh,” she says casually, signalling the server for another round of drink. “Thirty or so. Your age, I guess.”

Colour me massively creeped out.

Alice steam-rolls right over my discomfort, seemingly without noticing. The waiter comes with our drinks. She is talking now about how she had a boyfriend recently. There was just this like sexual chemistry between them, you know? I mean, he had a wife, so they could never really be together, but she had gotten kind of doughy, you know, he just needed someone who was into fitness the way Alice was.

“His cock was just way too big though,” she says. “Like, terrifyingly big.” She has her phone in her hands. She turns it to face me. “See?”

There is a picture of a man on the screen. He is posing in front of of a mirror, holding his own phone in one hand, taking a selfie. He’s tall, with ripping muscles and a shaved head. He also has, as promised, a terrifyingly huge cock.

Lesbian Dating Tip #2: if you are showing your date a dick pic, you’re doing lesbian dating wrong.

I politely nod and take a sip of my wine. I’m suddenly incredibly anxious about the handful of very graphic pictures I’ve sent her of myself.

When dinner is finally finished, Alice gets up and wobbles inside to pay the check. She is gone for thirty minutes. I can’t bring myself to go look for her. A passing bus boy, seeing my distress, tells me that if I am looking for my date, she is at the bar, doing shots.

I thank him and turn away to watch the ducks bobbing in green lines on the river. I somehow manage not to cry.

When Alice comes back out she is half-staggering on the deck. She grins at me. She ran into a friend, she says.

We go home to her house and get into bed. She puts on a movie and passes out, fully clothed, with even her socks on. She snores heavily. I lay awake and stare at the ceiling, pinned in place by the weight of a crushed romantic fantasy.

In the morning, the trouble—or part of the trouble, anyway—is revealed. Her so-called open relationship is not actually as open as she said, and her partner is not happy about her having me here. Alice is wracked with guilt. She cannot bear it, she says. Her partner has been texting her constantly.

This just isn’t working out, she says, and then she coldly asks me to leave.

I get in my car and I drive the 1,000 kilometers back again in nearly a straight shot. In a bid for pathetic irony, the sun has vanished; it is grey and cold, pouring rain. The whole way I am crying, berating myself. Everything feels like my fault. I’m so stupid. Is there really something so wrong with me that this woman had to get hammered just to tolerate me? Am I such a screw up that this kind of woman is the only kind I’ll ever be attracted to?

By the time I get home, though, my hurt and disillusionment has turned to rage. It actually took me longer to drive to there and back than I was actually with her in Fairbanks on what was supposed to be a weeklong romantic getaway. I’m furious.

I pick up my phone, call Alice and lay into her—how the hell could someone be this shitty to someone? How could someone treat another human being this way? I thought you cared about me? I thought you were really an amazing person.

“I am an amazing person,” Alice says calmly. “None of this was my intention. What I do doesn’t mean anything.”

Lesbian Dating Tip #3: YOUR ACTIONS TOWARD YOUR PARTNER (OR ANYONE) MATTER.

Stunned, I hang up the phone. I pour myself a scotch and sit on the bed.

And I start to laugh. It’s as if a huge weight has been lifted off my chest. I take a sip of my drink. There’s a ringing in my ears. It’s the sound of me, dodging a bullet.

Follow Lori on Twitter.

*Story has been updated 5:00 PM Monday, March 19.

If Jupiter Ascending was the $200 million flop that broke the proverbial animal’s back, the Wachowskis’ previous effort had already hobbled the camel. 2012’s Cloud Atlas was a risky proposition, even by the Matrix directors' standards; an R-rated, three-hour pop epic set in past, present, and future, and based on a Booker Prize-shortlisted novel about the reincarnation of human souls. Financiers including Warner Bros. would need to see real returns to justify investing in it. They didn't.

Essentially an anthology movie of six simultaneously unfolding chapters, capable of transporting us within minutes from a Pacific island in 1849 to 1973 San Francisco to a wasteland 2311 Hawaii, Cloud Atlas was so complicated it took a six-minute trailer just to explain to audiences what it was. Less predictable, however, was the response from critics, who at the time couldn’t decide whether the movie was artistically success or failure. There’s still no consensus now.

It took three filmmakers just to realize this beast of a story: the two Wachowskis, Lana and Lilly, along with Perfume director Tom Tykwer (who’s also responsible for the film’s majestic theme music). And Cloud Atlas was always going to take time to unpack. It’s an art-house concept executed with blockbuster flair, an experiment in genre that shifts from farcical comedy to political thriller to dystopian science fiction and back for 171 minutes. It’s one of the most movies ever made, a Big Bang of ideas that only just manages to coalesce, thanks in large part to the decision to have the same cast members appear in every chapter of the bigger story.

Emphasizing its themes of destiny and oneness in bold capital letters, Cloud Atlas has its actors playing multiple roles—often of a recurring type, like the villain or the oracle—across its many timelines. Some fare better than others. Tom Hanks, accomplished as he is at playing Tom Hanks, proves incapable of stretching himself from Irish gangster to Scottish hotelier, while antagonist Hugh Grant proves an unlikely chameleon, convincing as whatever the Wachowskis throw at him: American slaver, Michael Caine-alike pensioner, post-apocalyptic cannibal chieftain and, most unlikely of all, 22nd-century Korean businessman.

Ben Whishaw plays a middle-aged housewife. Susan Sarandon shows up as a male, Indian physicist. Halle Berry literally disappears into the part of a white German-Jewish emigre. Rarely have actors been so aggressively cast against type. It’s this decision to abandon logic and have actors play genders and especially races other than their own that threatens to both date Cloud Atlas, a film released just six years ago, and make it arguably timelier than ever.

Nobody wants a return to casual race-swapping in the movies, but in a divided 2018 it’s also heartening to see a film, the brainchild of two trans siblings, earnestly argue that we’re all the same underneath our individual wrapping. Is the point obvious and inelegantly made? Yes, but when there are white supremacists in the White House and tales of female subjugation make headlines daily, an obvious and inelegantly made pitch for universal equality will still do.

This isn’t to say Cloud Atlas is a movie about race or gender. The film is so dense, a War and Peace-sized thesis could be written on all that it’s actually ‘about.’ Roger Ebert, who gave the film top marks, breathlessly embraced it as a film about everything. Other critics thought it “hokum.” Maybe both sides have a point. Because Cloud Atlas isn’t supposed to be one thing to everyone, but lots of things to lots of different people. It’s Schrödinger's blockbuster, at once crap and great, a rare big budget movie that was designed to actually divide its audience and inspire debate.

However you ultimately feel about the movie, Cloud Atlas will always be fascinating for at least one reason: love it or not, in spite of all odds, it exists. Behold, because nothing like it will ever be made again.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Brogan Morris on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

When his younger brother was killed in an accident at work this January, Omid, a Ph.D candidate at the University of Illinois, knew he had to see his parents. But because they lived in Iran—one of the countries on President Donald Trump’s travel-ban list—they could only enter the United States if they received an exemption or waiver. The government had indicated it would grant exemptions to some categories of people, like green-card holders, but Omid’s parents had no such status in the US.

Still, Omid was confident they’d be able to visit him by receiving a special waiver for applicants suffering undue hardship or whose presence might serve the national interest. After all, his mother had been hospitalized for heart problems exacerbated by grief, he said, and Omid—whose work making air-quality sensors was funded by the federal government—needed his parents’ support.

But last month, Omid’s parents received a terse email from the State Department revealing they were not eligible for a waiver, according to correspondence shared with VICE.

“If this waiver was real, I don't think anyone else would have been more qualified to get it,” Omid, who is 31 and asked that his last name not be published to protect his family from possible retaliation from the US government, told me in between sobs.

Omid’s parents were among thousands of people from the eight countries (six predominantly Muslim) on Trump’s travel-ban list who have sought visas to visit the US since the latest version of the policy went into effect in December. But recently-revealed data suggested the State Department had furnished just a tiny fraction of these applicants with waivers, often giving no concrete reason for denials. Now both the Muslim community and public officials are increasingly questioning whether the waiver program is real—or if it’s simply a way to protect the Trump administration’s unprecedented policy from legal challenges.

The White House included the waiver option in its third—and current—version of the travel ban after previous versions of the policy were blocked in court. The Supreme Court allowed that measure to go into effect on a provisional basis late last year, though it was expected to issue a full decision on the policy’s constitutionality in the coming months.

Out of 8,400 people who applied for visas after the new ban went in effect, only two had been granted waivers by the one-month mark, data shared with US senators by the State Department—and first reported by Reuters—showed. Such a plodding pace drew outrage from lawmakers scrutinizing the program.

“The Trump Administration claims that the waiver system can be used by people who pose no threat to our country—a grandmother coming for a wedding, for example, would be able to obtain a visa,” Chris Van Hollen, a Democratic US senator from Maryland, said in an emailed statement. “But these facts show that system is a farce designed to hide President Trump’s true purpose.”

Van Hollen, one of the recipients of the State Department data, said the high refusal rate of waivers showed the most recent travel ban was, like its predecessors, a “de facto Muslim ban in violation of our Constitution and our immigration laws.”

Since the time of the data released to Van Hollen, about 250 waivers had been granted, a US State Department spokesman told me last week. Still, it remained unclear whether the agency was following the law in its administration of the waiver program, according to Muzzafar Chisti, director of the Migration Policy Institute’s office at New York University. That’s party because the administration can withhold information about who is granted and denied waivers under immigration law.

“People will have to bring about facts of cases in which candidates who were denied had good reasons for waivers and see if this violates compliance for the State Department,” Chisti explained in an interview. “Then we have to see if waivers are being denied on the basis of some suspect reason like religion. We just frankly do not know enough about these individuals yet.”

When reached for comment, a US State Department spokesman insisted that only two were granted the first month because “it took time to determine if the applicant was subject to the Proclamation, and if so, whether they might be excepted or qualify for a waiver.”

The spokesperson added that a consular officer “carefully reviews each case,” and that an applicant can only qualify for a waiver if they “demonstrate to the officer’s satisfaction that: denying entry during the suspension period would cause undue hardship; his or her entry would not pose a threat to national security or public safety of the United States; and his or her entry would be in the national interest.”

But immigration attorneys working with visa applicants said they’ve had countless clients who should qualify for waivers receive denials.

“The administration is not abiding by their own rules,” said Shabnam Lotfi, an immigration attorney in Madison, Wisconsin, who is originally from Iran and works with visa applicants around the world.

Lotfi said she had clients who owned businesses in the US and had nonetheless been denied entry into the country. She also claimed to have seen clients with sick and dying family members receive denials. So many of her clients have been denied visas, Lotfi said, that she stopped advising them to even apply, given the time and money involved. A visa application costs at least $160, depending on the type of visa, plus applicants must pay for a medical check and travel to the nearest US embassy or consulate—which, for Iranians, is outside of the country.

“I can’t give people hope and I can’t take their time, energy, and resources when I know at end of the day the government is not going to issue the visa,” Lotfi told me, noting that her firm and others last week filed a class-action lawsuit against the State Department, among other government entities and officials, over the issue. (In a statement, a State Department spokesperson said, "As a matter of policy, we do not comment on pending litigation.")

That the government has denied waiver requests without much or seemingly any explanation has made the low number of waivers granted was even more concerning, according to Shayan Modarres, legal counsel for the National Iranian American Council.

“We don't have any information about who was granted these waivers,” said Modarres. “Are they issuing waivers to people who don't need them in the first place? We still don't have any transparency about how this policy is playing out.”

There is not even a form to apply for a waiver, Modarres noted, adding that an applicant must know to write a letter petitioning to be considered for an exception, as well as what to include to make a potentially strong case.

As a result, some people who might qualify for waivers have not even applied. Mania Aghdasi, a US citizen whose Iranian father unsuccessfully applied for a visa after his son and wife both died back in Iran, told me she and her dad never learned about the waiver possibility.

“He lost his hope after several times trying to come here,” said Aghdashi, a special education therapist who has lived in the US the past 20 years. Her father died recently, an event she attributed at least in part to his disappointment of not being able to visit her.

“When I first moved to the US I thought Americans were the kindest and most human people in the world,” she said. “But now, when I needed my government’s help, they did nothing.”

A State Department spokesman said he could not provide information about who was granted waivers, nor which countries they came from, because of privacy restrictions under the Immigration and Nationality Act. But Stephen Legomsky, former Chief Counsel of US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) under President Barack Obama, said it was unsurprising so few people had qualified for waivers given the terms.

“The hardship threshold alone has been set so high that only the rarest of applicants can meet it,” Legomsky told me. “And even if they do show undue hardship, the waiver will still be denied as failing to serve ‘the national interest’ unless the applicant can additionally show that a US person or entity will also suffer hardship.”

Legomsky added that the State Department officials who decided whether each individual qualified for waivers had also likely “detected an unmistakable message that the administration is strongly opposed to the admission of these countries’ nationals,” impacting their judgment calls on each case.

And for Aghdashi, Omid, and countless others desperate to reunite with their families, a faceless bureaucracy that leaves a sliver of false hope is wrecking their lives.

As Omid told me, “Losing someone like a brother is unimaginably difficult, but not being with my family makes it 100 times harder.”

Follow Meredith Hoffman on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

While the rest of her Sex and the City cast mates were busy beefing on Instagram, Cynthia Nixon was quietly gearing up to run for governor of New York—and on Monday, she made her bid for the state's highest office official.

Nixon, who played the divisive Miranda Hobbes on SATC, announced her candidacy in a video on Twitter. In the clip, she stalks the streets of New York City kind of like Carrie Bradshaw in the show's opening—only instead of that groovy samba beat, she makes her way through Manhattan to the tune of an inspiring monologue about ending inequality, improving public education, and fixing the city's failing subway system.

“Our leaders are letting us down,” she says in the two-minute spot. "We are sick of politicians who care more about headlines and power than they do about us. It can’t just be business as usual anymore.”

Nixon, a lifelong New Yorker, has been a progressive activist for years. She's made a name for herself campaigning for LGBTQ rights, calling for more funding for New York's public schools, and drumming up support for NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio—who's been butting heads with current New York governor Andrew Cuomo basically forever.

According to the New York Times, Nixon has been publicly toying with the idea of taking Cuomo on for months, and rumors that she'd enter the ring heated up when she started working with two former de Blasio strategists in early March. Somehow there's already a poll weighing how Nixon might do against Cuomo—and while her prospects don't look great, it's only been, you know, a few hours since she even announced she was running.

Cuomo is a popular incumbent with serious money, but there's a faction of far-left New Yorkers who want to see him out of office, the Times reports. And if he keeps on letting NYC's public transit system degenerate into a trash heap, people might be pissed off enough to vote for somebody who's vowed to fix it—especially considering she actually rides the damn thing.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Drew Schwartz on Twitter.

Related: Passengers Trapped on F Train

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

Online harassment is both terrifying and incredibly common. The solution isn’t as simple as turning off the computer and walking away. Although these hostile encounters occur in the virtual space, they can have serious real-world consequences. Victims can be plagued with mental or emotional stress in response to the damage of reputations or fearing for their personal safety.

HeartMob, a website that provides real-time support to people experiencing online abuse, defines online harassment as a variety of damaging behaviors such as hateful messages, doxxing, DDoS attacks, swatting, defamation, and more. The goal of the harasser is to drive the target off the internet or punish them by publishing personal information, sending threats, or promoting harm.

According to a 2017 Pew Research Center report, almost half of Americans have personally experienced online harassment. The majority of Americans (66 percent) have witnessed abusive or threatening behaviors online directed at others. Young women and marginalized minority groups are especially vulnerable to this kind of attack.

Although you might feel powerless if you’ve been threatened or abused online, you can manage the trauma. We consulted psychologists, legal experts, victim advocates, and survivors about how to best handle online harassment. Here’s what they said. Answers have been edited for length and clarity.

Document Everything

You should keep copies of the online harassment. Either take screenshots or print them. You may need evidence later for law enforcement or for a civil lawsuit. What starts as moderate harassment can escalate, and if it does, you will need to have copies of harassing and malicious remarks. Contact law enforcement. If you are underage, show the posts to your parents. Report the bullying to platform providers and/or have the harassing comments flagged. - Dr. Charlotte Laws, victims advocate and anti-revenge porn activist

Assert Yourself...

Online abuse—like nearly any type of abuse—relies on a victim’s sense of shame. When a victim gives into that shame by going silent, the abuser wins. Conversely, victory is only possible when a victim refuses to go silent. So speak out. Solicit help and support from others. Dig deep; find the courage to stand up. More and more victims are linking arms and refusing to be forced quietly into the night. This is how things turn around. - Candice Blain, attorney and founder of Blain LLC, a law firm specializing in helping victims of cyber abuse

But Ignore the Troublemaker

Sometimes your first reaction is to respond directly to the person/people posting abusive content about you. My advice: Do not engage. Do not give your harasser or bully the satisfaction. All too often, responding or engaging starts a downward spiral that often makes matters worse and muddies the waters for the victim when they do finally seek assistance from the legal system. - Carla Franklin, cyber abuse expert, survivor, and advocate for victims

Protect Yourself (and Look Out for One Another)

Take steps to lock down your personal safety to reduce the risk of further harassment. The responsibility to stop harassment lies with each one of us, and bystanders have a key role to play when we witness harassment that is often overlooked. We can't depend on social media companies or the police to take care of us. We have to depend on one another and work together to change the culture that makes online harassment acceptable. Here is our comic on counterspeech, which can especially be useful if you're witnessing your friend get harassed. - Emily May, co-founder and executive director of Hollaback! and Heartmob, a platform that provides real-time support to individuals experiencing online harassment

Reach Out

Many well-meaning people may advise you to “just log off." And while that can temporarily provide respite, you shouldn’t have to disengage from getting information, promoting yourself, sharing your thoughts, socializing, and all the other benefits of the internet because you have the unfortunate luck of being targeted. It can be frightening, embarrassing, and unnerving. Surround yourself with people who validate you. If the harassment starts to impair your daily functioning (feeling distress, difficulty eating or sleeping) reach out to a mental-health professional for support. - Kathryn Stamoulis, PhD, educational psychologist and adjunct professor at Hunter College

There Are Places That Can Help

You can find information on how to increase your privacy and on documentation in National Network to End Domestic Violence Technology Safety & Privacy Toolkit. No one deserves to be harassed online. You deserve to feel safe in all online spaces, and if someone is harassing you, look for resources to help you deal with that. - Erica Olsen, director, Safety Net Project, National Network to End Domestic Violence

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Anna Goldfarb on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

Natalie* was excited to begin seeing her therapist.

"I didn't go to see him because I was at a low ebb," she tells me. "It was the opposite. It was five years after beginning my transition, I finally had a semi-stable income and home life. I decided to invest in therapy and try to address some of my issues, which had been going back to my teens and before."

Natalie was 26 years old when she started the sessions. For more than a decade she had suffered from a debilitating eating disorder that had interrupted her school and university education. This was one of the main problems she wanted to address in therapy. Her status as a transgender woman, on the other hand, was not.

"I didn't consider it a problem," she says. "I obviously had my share of trouble with my gender growing up and when I came out. Workplaces are still a major struggle. But I'm luckier than most because my family were lovely and actually anticipating it. My friends were brilliant. Once it was all out and I could be myself, I was happy in my personal life."

But Natalie’s therapist, a private practitioner found through Google, saw things differently. Immediately, Natalie was taken aback when he asked her if she had "completed transition", meaning had she undertaken genital reconstruction surgery. Before the end of her first hour, he was suggesting that her eating disorder was connected to being transgender. He wasn't trying to be rude or hostile, she tells me, he was actually very pleasant – which made it even more difficult to object: "And, having no experience with therapy, I went in with the feeling that he was in the right and had the authority and I should listen."

That was the beginning of six months of therapy which left Natalie infinitely more vulnerable and distressed than when she began it.

Talk therapy is on the rise in Britain. A 2014 study by BACP (British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy) showed that 28 percent of people in the UK had consulted a counsellor or psychotherapist, compared to 20 percent in 2010. Anecdotally, of my immediate social circle I would estimate at least a third are either engaged in NHS cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or privately-sourced therapy.

Even in the ten years since I was a teenager, the perception of who might benefit from therapy has massively shifted. I remember desperately wanting to see a therapist when my self-harm and eating problems began to spiral during my late teens, but I can recall thinking quite clearly and calmly: 'No, your problems aren't serious enough.' I had the idea – as many people did, and still do – that to need therapy you must have suffered some quantifiable and catastrophic childhood trauma. This seems to be in the process of changing. While some people I know do indeed go to therapy to work through particular life events, many others go to simply try to understand themselves better – to use that understanding of their motivations and desires and fears to live better.

For transgender people, though, finding a therapist can be a minefield. I spoke with London-based therapist Louise Futcher – who specialises in sexual, gender and relationship diverse clients – to ask her thoughts about why this is. Louise treats a wide variety of people who find it difficult to access mainstream therapy. She tells me she is aware of an increase of therapists like her, although they remain small in number and difficult to locate outside of London. A therapist like Louise might make it clear, for instance, that they are capable of sensitively working with sex workers, polyamorous people, fat people and people who are transgender or non-binary. These are all demographics who are commonly let down by mainstream therapists.

"My experience is that the understanding around gender identity is surprisingly poor," she tells me, "and the dangers of that are great. The therapeutic relationship is so intimate and vulnerable, and we show so much of ourselves as clients, that to then be invalidated within that is potentially devastating. People do report that therapists go 'fishing' around to uncover the trauma that 'led to' the dysphoria."

This is something that came up time and time again when I discussed the subject with trans friends of mine: that therapists are over-eager to find an experience to "blame" their gender identity on. Not only is this counterproductive, it has the potential to re-traumatise people who suffer from dysmorphia or simply had a difficult time coming out as transgender.

Natalie* told me that she eventually made the decision to stop going to therapy when she realised she was spending days in advance of each session filled with dread; dreading having to defend herself and who she was, dreading having her real issues brushed aside.

WATCH:

I spoke to George*, who is non-binary, and heard a similar story. They had gone to a therapist looking to work through feelings of shame around their gender expression, and also some distressing memories of childhood abuse. Their therapist suggested that the abuse was responsible for their discomfort with gender identity.

"I would change the way I dressed for sessions," George told me. "I would not wear jewellery, and dispensed with the little make-up that I wore. It was intimidating and reminiscent of the emotional abuse I was experiencing with my father."

I asked Louise why it's so difficult for transgender people to find therapists who are sensitive to their particular needs.

"Therapists need to understand that their way of viewing and interacting with the world is heavily influenced by cultural context and that the 'default' is oppressive," she said. "The concept of gender we in the West work with is specifically based on certain ideas which have changed throughout history, and actually aren't subscribed to in other cultures. Gender itself isn't fixed or set, so connecting with or exploring different gender expressions and identities isn't some rebellion or trauma response, but actually finding what fits us best. And, really, who is that hurting?"

I'm hopeful not only that more therapists like Louise will train to specifically serve these communities, but also that mainstream therapists will become more reflective on their own normative values. While negative experiences with therapy can be potentially devastating, everyone I spoke to – even those who had suffered a bad encounter – was insistent that it can be life-changingly positive.

George* has since found a new therapist.

"She has always been respectful of my gender, effectively treating it as a non-issue unless I raise it myself," they said. "As a result, I often do. I'm still not sure what I am, but I'm almost certain I'm not ashamed anymore. This may not sound much, but it's enormous for me."

*Names have been changed

@mmegannnolan

This article originally appeared on VICE UK.

Over the weekend, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Special Summit brought leaders from 10 Southeast Asian nations to Australia, including Myanmar’s Aung San Suu Kyi. Ahead of her arrival, a group of Australian lawyers filed a motion in Melbourne’s Magistrates Court, attempting to prosecute the former human rights icon for crimes against humanity. The charges relate to allegations that human rights violations are currently being perpetrated against the Rohingya people in Myanmar, which have overshadowed the ASEAN summit.

Alison Battison, the founder and principal director of Human Rights for All, drafted large parts of the brief against Aung San Suu Kyi. The team also included three barristers: “Ron Merkel QC, a Melbourne barrister and former federal court judge, Marion Isobel who has done a lot work overseas in human rights, and Raelene Sharp who is an expert in Commonwealth law,” Battinson explained to VICE.

The attempt to lay charges was actually initiated by the Rohingya community in Australia. Sydney lawyer Daniel Taylor, who is heavily involved with the community, approached Battinson and co to ask if anything could be done ahead of Aung San Suu Kyi coming to Australia. “The reason; however, that there are no Rohingya names attached to the complaint is because a lot of them fear retribution if they are named a complainant, against themselves or their families,” Battinson says.

The brief accuses Suu Kyi of crimes against humanity for the deportation or forcible transfer of a population, specifically Division 268.11 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code Act (1995).

“Basically we are saying Aung San Suu Kyi has effective de facto power and control over the elements of the Burmese government and military involved, who are committing these atrocities,” Battison said. According to the UNHCR, the Rohingya's situation is the "world's fastest growing refugee crisis" with more than one million fleeing into neighbouring Bangladesh fearing for their lives.

If successful, Battinson explains, the case would be significant for both Australian and international law. “This has never been done before in Australia. [But] the legislation that was put in place to reflect the Rome Statute in Australia, this situation is precisely the reason it was put into place,” she says.

The legal team filed the private prosecution application in the Melbourne Magistrates Court late Friday last week. A brief was submitted to the office of the Australian Attorney-General Christian Porter, who swiftly told media he will not consent to the prosecution of Suu Kyi.

“The Attorney-General has stated [he thinks she] has diplomatic immunity and he therefore wouldn't consent to prosecuting her,” explains Nina Dillon Britton, a University of Sydney law student who helped Battinson prepare the brief against Suu Kyi, “but that's an appealable decision.”

Key to this is the fact that, although Aung San Suu Kyi holds the powerful role of state counsellor within Myanmar’s government, she isn’t actually the country’s president. The president is in fact Htin Kyaw. “Aung San Suu Kyi holds a tenuous position as she’s not an official head of state she might actually not be immune,” says Dillon Britton.

“She actually claims her position as state counsellor is higher than the president. Myanmar is ruled by a power sharing government between military and her, Dillon Britton explains. “[Aung San Suu Kyi is] overseeing the departments trying to stop the return of the Rohingya and plays into narratives that the Rohingya people are not legitimate Myanmar citizens that are used to justify the genocide.”

Battison says Attorney-General Porter’s remarks won’t not deter the legal team. “Obviously we would have preferred for the Attorney-General to contact us directly, we’re still waiting to hear from him officially,” she says, noting she can’t comment too much as it’s an ongoing legal case. “But we do note that in similar cases such as Augusto Pinochet in the UK that their superior court held that this was an issue that constituted a crime against humanity that Pinochet could be tried for.”

To build a case against Suu Kyi, Battinson and her team looked at a number of elements. These include whether crimes against the Rohingya people have “occurred on a widespread scale, if it's was carried out against a civilian population, if people were lawfully in the area before they were moved on, how they were moved on and so on.”

WATCH: Myanmar's Rohingya Fight Back Against Alleged Genocide

Aung San Suu Kyi Continues to Deny Any Genocide Against the Rohingya People

VICE also received press releases from an anonymous source, who claims they are from the office of the Myanmar State Counsellor. The releases demonstrate a persistent denial by Suu Kyi's office that there's been any crimes perpetrated against the Rohingya people. One directly addresses the events of August 2017, which are generally considered the largest wave of violence in the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya in Myanmar’s Rakhine State.

The "attacks" that occured on August 25 and 26, 2017 were led by 4,000 terrorists, the release claims. “According to the hard evidence found by the Tatmadaw investigation body, at least 10,000 to maximum 20,000 residents participated in attacks on police outpost,” it reads.

Additionally, the statement claims that whole villages, including children, had sworn allegiance to terrorists and set fire to their own homes. “In the terror attack on 25 August, 2017, extremist terrorists led by ARSA [Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army] launched coordinated attacks in 37 villages including an army headquarter and 30 police stations, with 500 to 700 residents in each place with swords, spears, improvised explosive devices and other weapons... The attack was not successful though hardcore members of ARSA extremist terrorists, many villagers and even the children joined the attack.”

But according to Dillon Britton, the forced expulsion and ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya “ties into the ‘war on terror’, where all Rohingya are viewed as terrorists and thus collateral damage due to the supposed difficulty in discerning between innocents and terrorists.”

Furthermore, as the “Rohingya are Muslims in Buddhist majority country, they were not recognised under the Myanmar citizenship act. Not viewing them at citizens and the war on terror are the major reasons for their expulsion and the genocide,” she concluded.

Over the weekend, the Rohingya community in Sydney and their supporters held a rally where many refugees spoke about family trapped in Rakhine or refugee camps in Bangladesh. “We have not come here as victims... we have come to show the Burmese regime the meaning of justice. We are here to hold the oppressors to account,” a speaker told the protest.

On Wednesday, university students across the country will be attending protests against Australia training Myanmar’s military. Students from the Anti War Movement in Myanmar have prepared a statement to be read out at the event, in a display of international solidarity.

Follow Liam on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE AU.

In 2015, I was scrolling through Tumblr and came across “You’re a lost thing,” a quote that I quickly reblogged, screenshot, and made my phone backdrop. The words were a reminder that my life would be a journey of constant searching, not because of failure, but because we are all adrift in a world that offers more questions than answers. Eventually, I traced the insightfully simple line back to Bone, a collection of poetry released in 2014 by Yrsa Daley-Ward. The English born Nigerian-Jamaican writer penned the book while living in South Africa and working as a model. It’s an interrogation of self, offering a lyrical autopsy on the manner in which we are harmed by the traumas of those who share our dark skin, female gender, and cultural displacement.

As I explored Daley-Ward’s oeuvre, I realized that she is a master at expressing black pain in a manner that offers a collective catharsis. In On Snakes & Other Stories, the collection of short stories she published a year before Bone, she wrote about the complicated dynamics between families, doomed but exciting love affairs, and personal reawakenings. It was Daley-Ward as the observer, delivering fiction from truths she’d seen in her own life. This June, she’ll release her third book, The Terrible, a memoir of her childhood in the Northwest of England with her loving mother Marcia, the man she once called her father, and her little brother Roo.

With tens of thousands of followers across Instagram and Twitter, she’s built a dedicated and loyal audience who comment on her posts with emojis of heart eyes, wide smiles, roses, and bright gold stars. I think her work resonates because it is devoid of vagueness and calculated universality. Instead, she confidently expresses her specific racial experiences while still appealing to mainstream audiences with her vivid storytelling.

I recently spoke to the author, who Skyped with me from her new apartment in New York City. We talked about poetry, modern art, and condoms. Here’s what the rising star had to say.

VICE: What first drew you to poetry?
Yrsa Daley-Ward: I am not drawn to poetry in particular. I am drawn to all forms of writing: prose, scripts... It just so happens that I released a poetry book. What I like about poetry is how succinct you can be which is is a wonderful way to convey a point. I love the brevity.

It has to be one of the most strict genres of writing because it comes with set rules on form, subject matter, even word length. Did you find that restrictive?
No. I don’t adhere to rules. I don’t pay attention to noise. By "noise," I mean the standard format of writing poetry. I just write how I write.

Does your new book, The Terrible, continue themes from Bone ? Or is it something completely different?
You’ll see similarities because Bone does have autobiographical material in it. When you read The Terrible you’ll see a part and maybe remember that, Oh, She wrote a poem about this. Also, it’s written in poetic prose. So there are similarities.

Most people tend to forget that there is a certain amount of vulnerability and emotional nakedness that comes with sharing your experiences. You write especially about intimate and private subjects. Do you ever find yourself holding back so you still hold onto things that are yours? Or is total transparency the goal?
Writing is incredibly exposing. The Terrible is a memoir. You can’t get anymore exposed than that. It’s very gritty and there are some difficult and uncomfortable things in it, but I think as a writer things should scare you. It’s a vulnerable place to be in. But vulnerability is something I am happy to engage with. My main goal is to feel something. We are empathetic people (most of us!) and so I want people to feel touched.

Who do you want to reach with your work?
It’s for everybody really. If anyone finds it and it resonates then it’s for them. But being who I am, being a black woman, black women will see themselves more clearly in my work. But as I always say, “experiences are universal.” So I want my work to reach everybody.

What artists have inspired the ways you approach your work?
I am constantly inspired. And it’s always changing or else I get bored. But if we were to say top five right now it would be: Jeanette Winterson, that never really changes; TonI Morrison, Lina Viktor, who is this amazing painter who uses gold leaf and royal blue and her work is just so beautiful; Nicola Thomas; and Kara Walker.

Do you ever find yourself intimidated by the depth of your thoughts?
No. If anything, I find myself wondering if I have gone deep enough. I am an Aquarius, so I usually just skim through things and I also live a very fast paced life. So, I am always trying to go deeper and not just skim through my thoughts.

The simplicity of your work could sometimes be met with skepticism and seen as “insta-poetry” because you're speaking in ways that are accessible to everyone. Was that your intention?
I love that. I love that people would call it “artless.” Tracey Emin had a piece [ My Bed ] that a lot of people called “artless.” She had condoms on it and all kinds of weird stuff and I thought that was very interesting. And it was art. She was even shortlisted for The Turner Prize. We find art in different things and not everyone will like your work. I find art in offerings and vulnerability and these are things are applicable to modern art.

Would you call yourself a modern artist?
Absolutely.

In terms of poetry and criticism, do you find that certain critiques are code words to invalidate the depth and impact of your work?
Maybe. I don’t want to come off as vague with this question but the thing is the language could be coded because I am black, because I am a woman, or because of the other many things that I am. It could be any of those, which is why I don’t think about it. It’s not something I concern myself with.

From your work, you seem to be in a place of constant peace with your emotions. Does that ever overwhelm you?
No. Never. In fact, it makes me feel more settled. I am happy to have that insight where I can be OK with my discomfort and the feelings I am having. I like that. I am in love with clarity towards my own feelings and I think confusion is far worse than discomfort.

Photo by Mike Kobal, courtesy of Yrsa Daley-Ward

You're also a model. What's the difference between taking up space with your words and taking it up with your physical presence?
It’s hard to say. I definitely feel a lot more validation using my words, but you’d think it would be the opposite. But wherever both these forms of art can intersect, I am all for it. I am really into mixed media right now and it’s something that I feel strongly because I am not either/or. I am both of these things. You’re everything that you are and not just separate parts of a thing. I am at a point now where I am very happy and comfortable to embrace both of them and use them to take up space because for so long I was a shy model. And for so long I was a silent writer. Now I am comfortable expressing myself loudly with both.

You recently tweeted, "Something about the way black women hold your heart. You can leave them all you like, but you can't stay gone." What did you mean by that?
That came from a personal experience that I had. I’d just recently come out of a relationship and a friendship, but I could still feel this person everywhere. Being with that person, and them being who they were, our relationship just felt right. It felt like home. It was vibrant and joyful and that got me thinking about black women and love in general.

There is a quote I have seen attributed to you, "I'm the tall dark stranger those warnings prepared you for." I am really interested in your use of the word dark because it means black in such an undeniable way. But I have seen songs, poetry, and stories that use the word brown instead of black. To me, that speaks to the need to deny blackness, but still portray some kind of racial difference. As someone who is adept at using a small amount of words to pack a big punch, what does it mean to use dark or black as opposed to brown ?
I am a melanated human being. I am West-African and Jamaican heritage, so for me dark is who I am and how I see myself. For me, dark is complete, it’s fullness, and melanation in the sun. I would never call myself, “The brown stranger,” because that’s not who I am. That’s not me. I’m dark.

Your work stands alongside that of Warsan Shire and Nayyirah Waheed. The three of you write about similar themes and share similar audiences. Success for black female creatives is usually set up to uphold the notion that there is only room for one. Does that ever fuck up with your mental state?
No. Absolutely not. Nayyirah and I have both shared each other’s work and I have also shared Warsan’s, too. I think it’s so important to get rid of this “only one allowed” because we need to raise each other up. We need contemporaries. Number one is lonely, and number two, where is the inspiration? We need to be able to inspire each other because being the only one, that is never a good place to be in.

This story is a part of VICE's ongoing effort to highlight the contributions of black women around the globe who are making a difference. To read more stories about strong black women making history today, go here.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Tari Ngangura on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

On Monday, Ivanka Trump graced a job training site in Iowa that partners with local businesses and students to tout her father's infrastructure plan and help some students out with their science projects. Donning some safety goggles and a white lab coat, Trump joined students as they wrote code, programmed a wind tunnel, and checked out the embryo of a zebrafish, Business Insider reports.

But none of those experiments captured quite the same level of sheer concentration and determination that Trump showed while testing the nicotine levels in the liquid used in e-cigarettes, also known as "vape juice." Behold:

By Tuesday, the "vape juice" photo Trump originally shared on her Instagram made its way to Twitter, where users provided their own take on the first daughter's field trip.

And while the photo might be the most meme-able thing to come out out Team Trump in the last, well, few hours, it's still not the worst example of someone in the White House who's cosplayed as a science enthusiast.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow VICE on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

Regardless of what you think about resident White House homophobe Mike Pence, you have to admit the vice president has at least one quality asset: his bunny, Marlon Bundo. The gentle creature has an impressive job title (BOTUS), a fire Instagram, and as of Tuesday, his very own children's book, written by Pence's daughter Charlotte and illustrated by his wife, Karen.

Alas, Pence somehow managed to make even a goddamn bunny controversial by sending him on a book tour that stops off at Focus on the Family, an anti-LGBTQ organization that pushes conversion therapy and campaigns against gay rights. So in a last-ditch effort to save old Bundo from the throes of intolerance, the folks over at Last Week Tonight published their own children's book about the rabbit—and in their saga, he's gay.

Now, their tale about Bundo falling in love with another boy bunny is outselling the Pences' original book, the Huffington Post reports. A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo nabbed the top spot on Amazon's bestseller list, while its straight competitor—Marlon Bundo's Day in the Life of the Vice President—is sitting at number four.

In Last Week Tonight writer Jill Twiss's LGBTQ-friendly tome, Marlon Bundo vows to marry Wesley, only to have a crusty stink bug who runs things in the animal kingdom—and shares an uncanny resemblance to Mike Pence—tell him that "boy bunnies have to marry girl bunnies." Thus begins the two lovebirds' (er, lovebunnies'?) quest to stay together in the face of discrimination—namely, some smelly, power-hungry dickhead telling them how they should live their lives.

Screenshot via Amazon

In the Pences' version, poor Bundo is subjected to hopping after his "Grampa" (Pence) while the Vice President does whatever he does all day: presumably getting shit-talked by Trump, sitting in on bizarre meetings, eating with only men, and trying to ignore the queer dance parties happening outside his front door.

Screenshot via Amazon

Proceeds from both books are going to charity, though while the Pences are only giving away a portion of the cash, Last Week Tonight is donating 100 percent of what it makes, the Associated Press reports.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Drew Schwartz on Twitter.

Related: Mike Pence: SMH Personified

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

Natalie smiles "a lot less" at people now than she used to. The 22-year-old Liverpudlian used to be gregarious – "one of those people that smiled at everyone" – but she's become much more reticent since moving to Nottingham for university three years ago and experiencing a huge amount of street harassment in the city. "I'm very aware of who I smile at now," she explains. "I worry that people can see it as an invitation and think I'm interested."

Wolf whistles, being catcalled on her way to the shop and being told she's got a "nice bum" are things Natalie has come to expect. There were occasions, too, when the encounters felt more sinister. The time, for instance, when two men followed her while she shopped in the city centre, and asked for her phone number. The time a man in his late fifties approached her, looked her up and down and hissed through gritted teeth that he wished he were 20 years younger. "It even makes me feel sick thinking about it now," she says.

Had any of these intimidating events happened after April of 2016 – and had Natalie chosen to report them – they could have led to arrests and potentially criminal charges, since this was when Nottinghamshire Police became the first force in the UK to recognise misogyny as a hate crime. Under the policy, police investigate "incidents against women that are motivated by an attitude of a man towards a woman, [including] behaviour targeted towards a woman by men simply because they are a woman".

Leering, groping, stalking, taking unwanted photos, sexually explicit language, unwanted sexual advances and online abuse are among the incidents that can be flagged. Some media reports of a ban on wolf whistling and complimenting women initially attracted criticism of the initiative, says Lizzie Jackson, engagement officer at Nottinghamshire Police. "But we just corrected that and made it clear that it's about the behaviour that causes women fear."

Chloe, 32, is among the women to have reported an incident. "It was spring, and I was walking to work through a secluded wooded area in the middle of the day," she recalls. "I encountered three youngish lads. They didn’t say anything until I'd passed them, then one of them yelled at me quite aggressively: 'You look like you need a big fat cock in your mouth.'"

Because she was alone and there were three of them, Chloe felt threatened, scared they were going to do something else. She was left shaken, but her fear turned to anger once she'd established that they hadn't followed her and she was safe. When she called the police, the incident was recorded and officers tried to find the perpetrators. The force, she says, took her seriously and listened, and is making Nottinghamshire safer for women.

"People might see what happened to me as trivial – they just shouted words at me, but words can carry a lot of power and meaning, and they can be used to frighten people," says Chloe. "Also, the attitudes – the sexually aggressive, misogynistic attitudes – that those words represent are what are really worrying and dangerous, because those attitudes underpin other forms of gender-based violence, like domestic violence and rape. So even though what happened to me can't be put alongside the experience of serious sexual assault, it's still really important that those things are recognised for what they are, and the link between those actions and other crimes against women [is made]."

After its first six months, there was a 100 percent satisfaction rate among victims who had come forward to police, says Martha Jephcott, who campaigned for the introduction of the policy in Nottinghamshire and is the lead organiser on misogyny hate crime for social justice non-profit Citizens UK. By comparison, hate crime victim satisfaction across the board is typically low – only about half are happy with police responses, alongside nearly three-quarters of general crime victims.

Women "walk taller" now, and feel better coming from a city where there is a clear message that misogynistic behaviour is unacceptable, says Helen Voce, chief executive of Nottingham Women's Centre. "Women feel safer just knowing if anything did happen they've got a bit of redress," she explains.

The women's centre, alongside researchers at Nottingham Trent University and the University of Nottingham, began a major piece of research at the beginning of 2018 to assess the impact of the policy and identify necessary improvements. The full results of the evaluation are due to be released in May, but early findings show that women are now more likely to report misogynistic incidents.

"Most people have heard about it and say it's a good idea," Voce adds. "The overwhelming response is that people want it to continue." Jackson says Nottinghamshire Police has no plans to scrap the policy.

Since the enforcement began, there have been 167 reports of misogyny. Of these, 68 were treated as hate crimes, including public order offences, harassment and assault, and 99 were treated as hate incidents, such as intimidating behaviour, inappropriate sexual comments and verbal abuse. The reports have led to four arrests and one charge.

These figures suggest, however, that dozens more incidents are likely to be going unreported – a theme already seen across existing strands of hate crime nationally – because the true scale of the problem doesn't appear to be reflected in them. About 90 percent of women in the UK experience street harassment before their 17th birthday; nearly three quarters of 16 to 18-year-olds say they hear sexual name-calling towards girls at school daily; and 85 percent of women aged between 18 and 24 report receiving unwanted attention in public places. In Nottingham specifically, a 2014 Nottingham Citizens study found that 38 percent of women reporting a hate crime explicitly linked it to their gender. Men, meanwhile, made no similar links.

Harriet, who's 22 and also lives in Nottingham, would face catcalling at least twice a day, but has so far been hesitant to report any incidents to the police. "You second-guess yourself," she explains. "I'd think what happened to me is not bad enough to report. I always just thought there's no way I'd be taken seriously."

Instead, she – like Natalie – has taken steps to avoid negative attention. "If I'm walking to a friend's house in the evening to meet before we go out for drinks, I won't put red lipstick on until I get there," Harriet says. "[The catcalling] has made me feel like I want to blend into the background." The pair aren't alone in this – almost three-quarters of women have done something to guard themselves against the threat of harassment, such as changing their route to work or avoiding certain places.

Photo: Dmitri Maruta / Alamy Stock Photo

Natalie and Harriet are unequivocal in their support for the move made in Nottinghamshire to treat misogyny as a hate crime, but both have yet to see it prove to be transformative. They expect, though, that this would change if the policy were rolled out nationwide – a notion that already has cross-party support.

Labour MP Melanie Onn led a parliamentary debate at the beginning of March aimed at adding misogyny to the existing five strands of centrally monitored hate crime – race, religion, sexual orientation, disability and transgender identity. Formally monitoring this type of incident across the country will, she said, "better prevent violence against women, support early intervention against lower-level incidents and give women greater confidence in reporting the actions that, too often, have become the wallpaper of their lives".

Voce believes a national policy would act as a greater deterrent against people committing misogynistic hate crimes in the first place, and says that raising the profile of the issue would help support preventative work in schools through healthy relationships education.

Jephcott agrees, and expects a commitment at government level would help tackle underreporting. "If we were to have a national standard, women everywhere could have the same experience and the same access to justice," she says. "That’s really empowering, and we would see an increase in reporting that would then have a knock-on effect on the number of crimes being committed."

However, Onn faced challenges in Parliament, notably from Tory MP Philip Davies – who has previously been referred to as a "troglodyte" by his own colleagues for his views on equality – about the decision to put forward a policy that concerns prejudice against women only, and not men too. Victoria Atkins, the Conservative minister for women, warned against "creating laws that inadvertently conflict with principles of equality", and questioned whether hate crime legislation is the best way to treat the problem, because "women are not a minority". Interestingly, both Natalie and Harriet believe a national policy should also take misandry into account.

Onn countered by arguing that the power imbalance in society frequently puts women in a minority position, despite the numbers telling a different story. And Jephcott believes treating misogyny as a hate crime specifically is "absolutely the right decision" because it's about survivor perspective.

Nottinghamshire Police says it's too early to say if its work has led to a decrease in misogyny, because it's "just one part in a longer-term shift in attitudes", but it has submitted a report to the National Police Chiefs' Council and is awaiting feedback on whether it will be implemented nationwide. The Home Office says it is also interested to see the results of the work, but that it already has "robust legislation in place that can be used to protect women from a range of crimes".

Hardyal Dhindsa, lead on hate crime at the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, and Police and Crime Commissioner for Derbyshire, says it's crucial to look at the forces where misogyny is recorded as a hate crime to see if it is improving outcomes for victims. Steps could then be taken "to ensure that anybody who reports harassment and other crimes based on their gender is taken seriously, and that perpetrators are brought to justice".

For many women, though, it's not about punishing people, says Jephcott. Most just want an end to misogynistic incidents. Natalie hopes they stop being the norm – something women are conditioned to expect "as part of being a woman".

Chloe says top-level action to reduce the problem would show that those who have the power to keep people safe are taking women's safety seriously. "It's brilliant that incidents motivated by racism and homophobia, for example, are recognised as hate crimes," she says. "Taking hatred of women as seriously as those kinds of issues sends out a really strong message about the kind of society we want to live in."

@emilysgoddard

This article originally appeared on VICE UK.

For as long as I can remember, I’ve always stood out in my family. Unlike my brother, who had a pale, sun-sensitive complexion, I was swarthy. As a kid, I would spend all day outside absorbing the sun’s rays, tanning and turning my skin into a healthy, dark mocha colour. My friends, on the other hand, would burn in the heat.

I loved being darker because it made me different. Though, it prompted a lot of questions in me, a second-gen Canadian with parents from El Salvador.

When I first asked my dad why I was darker, he immediately began regaling me with these long, hilarious tales of my grandfather who was a pure Amerindian man from Guatemala, and undoubtedly the darkest from my dad’s side of my family. He was a man of the land, a gambler, a machete-wielding badass, and a bit of a musician. But more importantly, he was the reason for the way that I looked.

“Son, you have Indian blood,” my dad would tell me. Indian, as in Indigenous to the Americas. He also told me that I am a descendant of the Mayans, and that my blood is mixed with European, Spanish blood. He told me about the conquistadors, Hernán Cortés, Moctezuma, Atlacatl—all borderline mythical figures that represented a harrowing, dark and twisted past woven together by genocide, slavery, and rape. I was hooked and I wanted to know more.

Years later, I watched this strange yet entertaining YouTube trend where vloggers and high-profile content creators were taking DNA tests. I quickly fell into a wormhole, watching every DNA test video I could find. For me, the best part was the reactions to their results. They were genuinely happy to find out they were 2.5 percent African or five percent Native American. The more I read about DNA testing, the more I discovered the extent of its popularity. It’s a booming industry.

According to estimates in 2017, DNA test subjects now exceed 12 million. The explosion in popularity is in part because companies like Ancestry.com and 23andMe have spent upwards to $100 million per year on advertising campaigns. Despite its rise in popularity, DNA testing has been highly criticized, with accounts of botched DNA results and the sketchy handling of people’s data inundating news cycles. Recently, people have been using the service to find out if they have predispositions for things like Alzheimers and Parkinsons disease. It’s led government regulated bodies like the FDA to file lawsuits. What’s more, children of sperm donors are using the service to reconnect with lost parents, prompting professionals to reconsider the legal issues surrounding DNA testing.

It’s all really mystifying how companies have managed to commodify our saliva, and how our government is reacting to this booming technology. Admittedly, however, my insatiable interest in my past far outweighed the ethical implications of DNA testing. So I decided to do one myself.

It took two weeks until my kit finally arrived in the mail. Inside the colourfully decorated package was a set of instructions and a vial. The process was simple: spit in the plastic tube, seal it, and send it off. I remember after sending it back to the 23andme headquarters, I thought to myself, what do I even want from these results? I vaguely remember believing maybe it would unlock something in me. Maybe it would change me, change who I thought I was. Maybe.

After a solid two months, I finally got the results.

Here’s what I learned, I am:

1. 49.3 percent East Asian & Native American
2. 32.4 percent European
3. 6.1 percent Sub-Saharan African
4. 3.7 percent Middle Eastern & North African
5. 8.4 percent Unassigned

You can actually look at the full report through this public link.

My saliva says I'm nearly half Native American.

Honestly, when I first got my results, I was surprised and almost happy to find out I am mostly “Native American.” It felt like my suspicions were finally quelled. I could feel my Indigenous and Spanish blood coursing through my veins. I got what I paid for, a renewed sense of self, a new identity.

Though, it was only a very brief moment of enlightenment.

Obviously, nothing actually changed. After all, these results are really just percentages vaguely indicating that I am associated with several specific regions on Earth. And really, that’s it. There’s no renewed sense of self, no reconnection with my past, just a bunch of percentage points.

What’s interesting is how this contrasts with what is being peddled in DNA testing advertising campaigns.

Take this commercial by Ancestry.com. It’s part of a series of ads that showcase people who’ve embarked on genetic “journeys” in which they discover who they truly are. In them, you see a diverse cast of people crying and getting emotional over the fact that they share genomes with a country they supposedly used to hate. We see how powerful these tests can be, and how they potentially have the power to bring people together and consolidate one’s perception of the self. But I don’t buy it.

To subscribe so deeply to your own DNA is just another form of genetic determinism, or a way of excusing your behaviour because it’s just in your “genes.” That’s not to negate actual predispositions, but to critique this idea of sudden self-realization by spitting into a vial. It’s a pipe dream.

I supposed the stories my dad told me as a kid were all I needed. My fixation over getting to the roots of my identity was probably a projection of my own boredom with who I am. I was sold on the idea that these tests would help me understand the real me. But It’s a ridiculous notion that you could just buy your way into discovering yourself. Don’t get me wrong, it was fun looking over my results and imagining my ancestors from all different parts of the world. But I know that who I am extends much farther than my genetic makeup. While I can’t pinpoint exactly the core of my identity, at least I know it’s not tied to a bunch of percentage points.

Follow Moses on Twitter.

Polyamory might look like a romantic and sexual free-for-all from an outsider’s perspective. But, even if you’re in a non-monogamous arrangement, it’s totally still possible to cheat. What “cheating” means, though, can vary. It really depends from person to person, relationship to relationship, and on the agreements you make with those you’re seeing.

The myth that cheating doesn’t exist within poly relationship styles, in fact, can be blatantly at odds with the personal philosophies of people who practice polyamory.

“The idea that cheating does not exist in polyamorous relationships is ignorance at its worst,” Bear, 40, who practices polyamory, told VICE. “Polyamory is about love, but that love has to have a strong foundation. Our relationship is founded on: honesty, communication, trust, and respect.”

To understand more about how those in poly relationships identify their boundaries and what constitutes “cheating,” we reached out to people who practice some form of non-monogamy. As always, it’s important to remember that there's a wide and diverse range of relationship styles and forms of breaching trust within relationships. These anecdotes are based on individuals’ personal experiences and do not speak for all.

Covertly Forming Relationships

“I was in a relationship with a man who decided to start dating his ex again a few months after we started dating. Not only did he not inform me that he started dating her—she was under the impression they were exclusive. It all came out after a couple of months, and he ended up choosing to be with her only when he was caught. It was a severe breach of trust.” —Nicole, 32

“I usually have two partners maximum so I may spend equal time with everyone. The number of partners one might have is usually set with the main partner/base partner or by personal self; if that number changes without consulting everyone I would also consider that cheating. I wouldn’t want my pack/unit to fall apart due to anyone feeling uncomfortable.” —Alex, 20

“I personally am more comfortable with partners who are really open and transparent about who they’re dating. I kind of want to hear about it. So, for me, uncomfortable feelings come up when I don’t know about my partners’ partners, my metamours. If I had a partner who engaged in a new relationship, and the relationship was going forward in an emotional way and they didn’t tell me, I would feel cheated on.” —Heath, 38

“I was in a steady relationship with this guy, and in the beginning of our relationship, we established what cheating was for both of us. We agreed if one of us started seeing another person and we don’t tell each other about it, that’s considered cheating.” —Olivia, 36

“The relationship I am involved in has set rules regarding bringing in others. First, when interest has been initiated, we must tell the others. Second, we discuss everything: feelings, boundaries, the details of the one who has either shown interest or who has become the subject of interest. Then we all meet in a neutral place, for lunch or dinner, and get to know each other. If any contact has been made without abiding to those rules, then it is cheating. If one of us goes on a date with someone new and doesn't follow the rules, they are cheating on us.” —Bear

Violating Sexual Health Boundaries

“I prefer routine STI testing and prefer to use protection with partners that I haven't consciously chosen to fluid bond with.” —Nicole

“If one person in the relationship fails to communicate honestly about an STI, trust and respect are both broken.” —Bear

“Say I have a partner and we make an agreement to have barrier-free sex… We make that agreement with the understanding that we will be open and transparent about our sexual behaviour with other people—and if our barrier usage with somebody else changes, that we would notify each other. Say that same partner goes and sleeps with somebody barrier-free and then comes back to me. Now, the person at that point has violated an agreement we had... But have they violated my consent? They haven’t violated my sexual consent or my body because they haven’t slept with me. If they did that and didn’t tell me—that, to me, would be cheating… If they tell me, it’s a renegotiation of our agreement.” —Heath

Going on Secret Dates

“Lying about going on dates.” —Nicole

“When my partner is starting to date someone new but they don’t say anything about it, I consider that cheating. [An ex] cheated on me by not telling me about another woman that he went on dates with twice. The reason I found out was because he called me and told wanted to see less of me (we only saw each other once a week) and wanted to see more of her because she’s familiar with sex club scene.” —Olivia

Failing to Communicate

“If they neglected to inform new potentials of the existence of current partners.” —Nicole

“In any of my relationships, I prefer to have open and honest communication. If communication ever fails, then the unit might not survive. If there is a breach in this communication and honesty, then I personally would consider that cheating.” —Alex

“We have to be honest with each other. Most importantly, we must be honest with ourselves. Before bringing in anyone else into the relationship, everyone involved sits down for a honest conversation. We express our true feelings, openly and honestly. If we don't, we are setting up a scenario for failure.” —Bear

“If someone is omitting information, blatantly lying, or obscuring a truth, then it’s a breach of trust. I don’t need to know every detail, but if it’s big enough to lie about it, then it probably shouldn’t be happening” —Nicole

You won’t be able to miss the Canadian government’s glaring, yellow health risk warnings that will be slapped onto every gram of legal weed sold in this country come legalization.

According to a set of proposed rules released by Health Canada Monday, the government wants licensed weed producers to sell weed in plain coloured packaging (the example they used was white), with a red stop sign graphic that indicates the product contains THC, and a separate yellow health warning.

The warnings the government has proposed for weed sound pretty dramatic. (Especially when you consider that alcohol, a substance with far graver health effects, doesn’t come with these types of warnings.)

In a media briefing Monday, Eric Costen, Director General of the federal government’s Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Secretariat, said the messaging is based on “an exhaustive review of all the available scientific research on cannabis.”

Nonetheless, VICE reached out to experts to fact check the proposed warnings.

WARNING: Cannabis smoke is harmful. Harmful chemicals found in tobacco smoke are also found in cannabis smoke.

It’s true that smoking weed will have negative health impacts, David Hammond, a professor at the University of Waterloo’s school of public health, told VICE. “People don’t realize if you light any organic material on fire, it will produce thousands of chemicals. Most of the chemicals that cause cancer are just from smoke,” he said. He recommended people vape cannabis instead of smoking it.

However, Jenna Valleriani, a PhD student at the University of Toronto who researches cannabis, said there are far more studies on tobacco smoke than weed smoke so it’s hard to definitively say the latter is just as harmful as the former. The reason for this is cannabis is illegal so there haven’t been a ton of clinical trials on it.

According to the American Lung Association, smoking weed heavily can damage the lungs and lead to conditions like chronic bronchitis.

In an interview with Health, Steven Hoffman, a scientific director for the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, pointed out that we don’t know “whether or not cannabis itself causes or possibly even prevents cancer from developing.”

Verdict: It’s complicated

WARNING: Do not use if pregnant or breastfeeding. Using cannabis during pregnancy may harm your baby and result in low birth weight. Substances found in cannabis are also found in the breast milk of mothers who use cannabis.

Once again, there’s limited research on this subject, however the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse says cannabis is the most popular "illicit drug" used during pregnancy and that prenatal exposure has been linked to adverse effects on cognitive development as well as premature birth and low birth weights.

A 2012 Pediatric Research article found that babies who had mothers that smoked cannabis during pregnancy were born 375 grams lighter than babies born to non-smoking moms.

Hammond told VICE that, as with nicotine or alcohol, mothers will pass on substances they ingest to their babies, both before they are born and during nursing. “Exactly how harmful it is, that’s really tricky,” said Hammond, because of the lack of clinical trials and women’s reluctance to admit they they have consumed an illicit drug while pregnant.

A Jamaican study that tracked babies born to mothers who used cannabis found that there was no significant difference in developmental outcomes of those babies and babies born to non-users, except that the cannabis babies scored higher on reflex tests at 30 days old. However the research is old, dating back to the early 90s.

Verdict: Accurate

WARNING: Do not drive or operate machinery after using cannabis. More than 4,000 Canadians were injured and 75 died from driving after using cannabis (in 2012). After cannabis use, coordination, reaction time and ability to judge distances are impaired.

Both the feds and the provinces are going after stoned driving hard, introducing tougher penalties and in some cases implementing a “zero tolerance” rule for drivers with THC in their systems.

Health Canada’s numbers are likely coming from this study. Valleriani pointed out the study is based on crude estimates, not actual crashes.

“The whole difficulty of detecting impairment would likely mean it'd be difficult to attribute deaths to impaired driving unless someone outright admitted to impairment.”

Once again, again research is limited and headlines on this issue in US states like Colorado, where weed is legal, are conflicting. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says while weed does negatively impact skills needed for driving, “it is unclear whether marijuana use actually increases the risk of car crashes.” Other studies suggest that drinking is still much more dangerous for driving than weed.

Verdict: Accurate but with qualifiers

WARNING: Cannabis can be addictive. Up to half of people who use cannabis on a daily basis have work, social or health problems from using cannabis. One in 11 people who use cannabis will become addicted. Up to 1 in 2 people who use cannabis daily will become addicted.

The debate over whether or not cannabis is addictive is highly contentious. But Hammond said while weed is less addictive than most other illicit drugs, “it’s not quite as benign as some folks will make out.” It comes down to the definition of addiction.

“Dependence used to be based on physiological withdrawal symptoms and stuff like that,” he explained, but “the classic definition of addiction is failure to control use and there’s some harm associated with that use.” In other words, if heavy cannabis ingestion is impacting your job, social life, or relationships, you may have problematic use.

Hammond told VICE he thinks the government has done a good job with trying to be nuanced in this warning, by being clear that it’s not recreational users who are likely to end up “addicted” to weed.

Verdict: It’s complicated

WARNING: Regular use of cannabis can increase the risk of psychosis and schizophrenia. Higher THC content can increase the risk of psychosis and schizophrenia. Higher THC content can lower the age of onset of schizophrenia. Young people are especially at risk.

Valleriani said although studies have found links between cannabis use and the early onset of schizophrenia (which is a type of psychosis), the strength of that relationship is still hazy.

“One could argue early initiation of cannabis use leads to an increased risk of early onset, especially for those with a pre-existing vulnerability and those who use cannabis daily,” she said, “but also third variables—like socio-demographic factors or using other drugs including alcohol and tobacco—make it more difficult for a clear picture.”

She also pointed out that many people report using cannabis to alleviate mental health issues, including depression and anxiety.

Hammond said the warning is important—especially in the case of products with higher THC content—because it may give pause to a person with a family history of schizophrenia.

Verdict: It’s complicated

WARNING: Adolescents are at greater risk of harms from cannabis. Early and regular use increases the risk of psychosis and schizophrenia. Using cannabis as a teenager can increase your risk of becoming addicted. One in 6 people who start using cannabis in adolescence will become addicted.

These warnings echo some of the other ones; the stat about teens having a greater risk of becoming addicted to weed comes from the US government’s National Institute on Drug Abuse. Hammond said the bottom line here is “you don’t want any young person using any drug frequently because their brain is still developing.”

Verdict: Accurate

Hammond said the goal of the warning labels should be harm reduction. He said it’s hard to get a message about a complicated issue like addiction down to one or two sentences, but “what these things do, if they’re effective, is get people talking.” Valleriana was a bit more critical. “While I see the need to be preventative, and I think warning labels are important, they are misleading,” she said. While it seems like the government may be fear-mongering to a certain degree, the question that really boggles the mind is why they’re being so hard on weed and yet alcohol requires almost no warnings.

Follow Manisha Krishnan on Twitter.

Buddha was a cute, innocent pug like any other until Mark Meechan—a "professional shitposter" who prides himself on being anti-PC as Count Dankula online—decided to teach him a new trick. He claimed to have trained the dog to throw up a Nazi salute every time it heard "Sieg Heil" and uploaded footage of the corrupted pup to YouTube—a stunt that landed him in court on Tuesday.

Meechan was convicted on hate crime charges in a Scottish court for uploading the video, which the presiding judge called "grossly offensive," the Telegraph reports. Despite Meechan's insistence that the clip was a joke—and that his right to free speech was under assault—the judge ruled the footage was "anti-Semitic and racist in nature," finding him guilty of violating the UK's Communications Act of 2003. He now could face up to six months in prison.

In the clip—tastefully titled "M8 Yer Dugs A Nazi" and viewed more than 3 million times—Meechan explains that he wanted to play a prank on his girlfriend, who adored her pug, by turning him into "the least cute thing I could think of." In that baby voice everyone puts on when they talk to dogs for some reason, Meechan goads Buddha into getting excited about the Holocaust.

"Buddha, do you want to gas the Jews?" he asks. "C'mon, gas the Jews!"

About as casually as you might say "here boy," he spits out the phrase dozens of times, until Buddha starts to perk up every time he hears it. After he sticks the pooch in front of a TV and shows him a Hitler rally from the 30s, he plops him on the floor and starts calling "Sieg Heil," prompting the mutt to raise his stubby paw in a Nazi salute.

Screengrab via YouTube

Meechan has since apologized for the video and insisted that he he didn't mean to offend anyone. As he tells it, shouting "gas the Jews" over and over again and posting footage of it online was just supposed to be funny.

"I actually hate racism in any way, shape, or form," Meechan said in his apology video. "It was done as a joke, as a dank meme, and purely just to annoy my girlfriend."

Meanwhile, he's been leaning into the whole "anti-PC warrior" thing, buddying up with the likes of Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson while he live-blogs his own court appearance on Twitter. He's scheduled for sentencing on April 23, but judging from his tweets, he's been taking the whole "going to jail for turning a dog into a Nazi" thing pretty well—or at least pretending to.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Drew Schwartz on Twitter.

Related: Richard Spencer on White Nationalism

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

While the internet is in no short supply of libido-enhancing, erectile dysfunction-fixing, and pelvic floor-strengthening remedies, none has quite the comically absurd allure as the boner-boosting boxer briefs designed by Vylyv Labs.

After a successful 2016 IndieGoGo campaign, the company has been refining and tweaking their wearable into a sleek, expensive looking pair of undies that they claim will protect the wearer “from a sedentary lifestyle and other threats to [their] manhood.” To encourage use, they've found a way to gamify the process.

As both a lifelong gamer and bona fide male kegel program reviewer, I've been captivated by the product since I first read about it. And after reading on their website that, after a month into my pelvic floor exercises with these trunks, I'd be able to "raise the angle and increase the hardness of [my] erection" I was sold. Who among us hasn't pulled out the protractor from time to time and wished for a few more degrees?

I got a pair of Vylyv trunks to test out for myself. While I doubted they would replace my Switch as my preferred way of gaming in my underwear, I thought perhaps they could help with my overall below-the-belt health as I exercised the oft-neglected pubococcygeus muscle group.

Form AND function

The underwear had the sleek, expensive, and clean look of a brand like 2(x)ist. The sheer black panels around the hipbones were a touch flashy for my taste but nothing I couldn’t stomach in the pursuit of good health. I tried them on and, despite making me look like Mitt Romney's idea of "spicing up the marriage," they were comfy enough.

A diagram of how it works, screenshot via the Vylyv site

It took me a second to wrap my mind around how the undies worked. As I worked my way through the accompanying app’s Kegal exercise challenges, an inflated air sac nestled beneath my taint relayed the pressure change from my clenching and unclenching my pelvic floor to an electronic disk magnetically holstered in a receptacle on my hip. This removable and rechargeable little oval, resembling one of the doodads that gets stuck to a temple in every other episode of Black Mirror, sent the pressure input information to the Vylyv app, which transformed them into gaming commands.

It all seemed simple enough, though I was now wondering why Vylyv chose white fabric for a product designed to have buttholes repeatedly pressed against it.

Once my disc was charged, I slipped it into the holster, the underwear registering the addition of the device by sending a multi-second vibration to my taint.

It turned out that I had to do a bunch of five minute workouts to earn points and unlock the actual games. They made me do stuff like clench my crotch to inflate a sphere on the screen. Sort of like those grip strength tester bar games.

Though the device had a vibrationless "ninja" mode setting and the website implied the suited men in its photos were stealthily Kegal-ing in the office, I refused to wear the underwear out in public, convinced that, even under pants, everyone could tell I was sporting them. The trunks went on and off specifically for the exercises. Nothing more or less.

My training got off to a rocky start as I struggled to properly calibrate the underwear’s sensitivity and get into the groove of the exercise regimen. The activities were also pretty boring, but I pushed through, focusing on the dessert that lay ahead once my veggies had been eaten. Eventually, I finally earned enough digital tokens to get a game.

While I hadn’t been expecting anything as robust as Mario, I was still a bit disappointed to discover that the only games I’d be able to play with the underwear was a generic run-in-a-straight-line platformer where I’d jump over spikes and gaps to reach a flag, signifying the end of the level. There was also a Flappy Bird clone available, but I’d have to level up my profile a bit to unlock it.

Your avatar in the game is a Dickbutt-esque anthropomorphic penis and testicles with a smaller set of genitals as a tail. As icing on the cake, I learned that those tokens I’d been accruing could not only be used to buy extra lives for the games, but also accoutrements like a cigar and sunglasses for my little wiener sprite.

I am unable to get past level 10. He won't even jump.

Alas, the actual gameplay left much to be desired. Tedium aside, Dick Butt’s responses to my pelvic prompts ranged from laggy to non-existent, no matter how hard I squeezed. Even after resorting to cheating by using my finger to push the air sac, I was getting nowhere. Eventually, I figured out that this was, in part, being caused by bluetooth disconnections, because the disc hemorrhages battery life and I was already out of juice less than an hour after fully charging up. A low batt warning would have been nice.

Exercise routines can’t always be fun, of course. Even the gaming-based ones. Acknowledging this hard truth, I pushed on for another two-ish weeks, gritting through my frustrating daily regimen and slowly leveling up my profile, unlocking new features and games along the way.

Fortunately, the Vylyv community is an encouraging one and, whenever I became too frustrated with my exercises and in need of a motivational boost, I’d check the Forum tab in the app to read up on other users’ thoughts and queries about the program.

“Does anyone else feel like those games are too hard? I’m suck at playing it,” lamented a user going by the handle Kumquat. Other users replied with validation of his feelings and suggestions that, with time and practice, things will get easier.

When another user shared that he’d just been told he has “a small dick,” commenters rushed in to offer digital pats on the back and offer new perspectives like “sometimes it’s not about the size.”

Unfortunately, the positivity of the group was not infectious enough, and my undie exercises quickly became too much of a chore to keep up with. This lack of input consistency resulted in every exercise feeling like a crap shoot, forcing me to eventually retire my briefs for good.

Though they hadn’t worked for me, I was encouraged to read that, for at least a few of these guys, the product was showing noticeable results and seemed to be worth their time and money. In fact, I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before one of these fellas has leveled up his pelvic floor to the point of beating “Through the Fire and Flames” on expert in Guitar Hero with his Vylyv underwear. Hopefully, by the time that happens, I’ll have finally figured out how to pronounce the company’s name.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.

When former Apprentice contestant Summer Zervos came forward during the 2016 presidential campaign accusing Donald Trump of sexual assault, the candidate responded by calling Zervos (and the many other women who accused him of similar deeds) "horrible, horrible liars." In response, Zervos filed a defamation suit that has been slowly working its way through the courts. On Tuesday, a New York state judge ruled that Trump will have to face the defamation suit despite his position as president, the New York Post reports.

Presidents are immune from lawsuits in federal court when it comes to matters of official conduct. But a 1997 Supreme Court ruling in Clinton v. Jones found that sitting presidents can be sued in federal court for matters unrelated to their official duties. The question facing Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Jennifer Schecter was whether a president can be sued in state court over conduct that took place before he became president. Trump's lawyers argued that he had immunity, but Schecter disagreed.

"[Clinton v. Jones] left open the question of whether concerns of federalism and comity compel a different conclusion for suits brought in state court," Schecter wrote in her decision. "Because they do not, defendant’s motion to dismiss this case or hold it in abeyance is denied."

Zervos's suit, which she announced with her lawyer Gloria Allred last January, claims that Trump "debased and denigrated" her when she came forward "to inform the public of the facts she knew were true, to make clear that Donald Trump had kissed and groped her without her consent, repeatedly." In oral arguments last December, Trump's lawyers tried to get Schecter to dismiss the case, arguing that their client only used the word liars as campaign rhetoric.

According to Politico, Schecter also declined to halt the case until Trump's presidency was over, meaning that he might have to submit a deposition about his contact with Zervos while in office. The former Apprentice contestant claimed that Trump touched her inappropriately,"thrusting his genitals" at her during a work meeting at the Beverly Hills Hotel in 2007.

There are still many obstacles facing Zervos's suit, but Schecter's ruling means that it will continued to be litigated. The ruling could also pave the way for more civil suits against Trump at the state level while he's still in office.

Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of VICE delivered to your inbox daily.

Follow Lauren Messman on Twitter.

This article originally appeared on VICE US.