In the video game Stardew Valley, the player leaves their corporate job behind to live as a farmer in the countryside, where they manage their farm, battle monsters, and build relationships with townspeople. Importantly, the aforementioned means players play at labor, spending numerous in-game hours doing physical labor (e.g. chopping down trees, tending their farm, fighting monsters) and emotional labor (e.g. giving townspeople gifts, dating). Therefore, through this project, I explore how the identities and experiences of femme-presenting and feminized people of color (POC) impact their gameplay decisions in Stardew Valley, specifically how and why they play at physical and emotional labor. The term "femme-presenting" can apply to anyone who is perceived as feminine by themselves or by others. The term "feminized" is for people who may not want to come off as femme-presenting, but often still do according to systems/society. Over the course of five biweekly meetings over roughly ten weeks, eight participants play Stardew Valley while I observe and ask questions. By reviewing the recorded gameplay footage and our conversations, I examine what each individual player prioritizes (e.g. aesthetics, narrative, money) and why they do so. My analysis of how participants play at labor relies on an understanding of how being a femme-presenting/feminized POC interacts with their additional various other identities (e.g. sexuality, ability, class) to subsequently influence their gameplay decisions. Anticipated results include participants playing at labor in Stardew Valley for the sake of escapism, a sense of control, and to build community. This study reveals the need for further interventions in video game studies which center cozy gaming spaces, femme/feminized communities of color, and feminist theorizing.

The last decade has seen unprecedented legislative attacks on Sexual and Reproductive Health(care) and Rights (SRHR). In the US, barriers to women’s reproductive healthcare access, particularly for termination of pregnancy, are increasing at the local, regional, and national level through numerous institutional and legislative sanctions; the construction of such changes reverberating on a global scale via policies such as the Global Gag Rule (GGR). Reinstated by the Trump administration, the rule (also known as the Mexico City Policy), is a regressive, inimical policy, restricting American foreign assistance to organizations providing legal abortion services—regardless of the organization's adherence to local laws. This represents a significant setback for global health and human rights efforts, particularly for vulnerable communities who already face social stigmatization and systemic barriers to accessing critical healthcare. In the case of Kenya, a substantial recipient of American aid, US regulations stand in direct contradiction to the country’s own constitution, thus forcing local organizations to choose between complying with the policy or providing care at the expense of funding. Through exploring Kenya’s structural and organizational reconfiguration in the face of interventionist policies such as GGR, this project aims to explore the manner in which foreign aid influences— and often, stifles— the progression of developing nation’s SRHR and impedes local organizations from facilitating care; thereby exacerbating existing gender inequities that trickle beyond the healthcare sector. The methodology employed involves examining the formation of foreign funding from International Development agencies, placing such data in cross-examination with US Congressional changes while tracking foreign funding influence on domestic developmental institutions in Kenya. In considering Kenya as a case study, this research seeks to illuminate the gendered inequities prevalent in SRHR interventionist policies and how they take shape, simultaneously attesting to the implications of the paradox of "development" and its disparities globally.