The “Women’s March”

There have been a few technical problems with the site that I’ve had to work out. Those should be taken care of before the end of the week – I feel like I have missed so many things to talk about. Let’s start with the women’s march last week.

This is a fascinating topic, and people have asked me many questions about it this week.  Of course, as with everything else these past 9 days, people are freaking out about everything.  I took the time to interview four women that I know that participated in the Women’s March to get the most honest idea of why they were marching and exactly what they were concerned about. And just for full disclosure – the  group consisted of a teacher, an adjunct professor, a legal assistant, and a server.  Here is their main list of concerns. (please keep in mind these concerns were common to all four interviewees)

  1. Pro Choice / Pro Birth-control
    1. Responses ranged from “women should have the right to choose when to have a baby” and “any regulation of birth control is sexist and discriminatory towards women.”
  2. LGBTQ Rights (marriage should be between 2 people not a JUST a man and woman)
  3. Presidential Cabinet “selections” of EPA, Sec. Education, Sec. State.
  4. General “loss of rights because of conservative senate”
  5. Equal pay for equal work

Let’s go point by point and address these things.

First, the pro choice / pro birth control argument.  I’m not sure if the women who marched for this cause are aware of these things and in no way do I mean this sarcastically … but birth control in and of itself is a commodity that can be purchased — it’s a thing.  It’s not a right. Its necessity is not enumerated in the constitution and it’s something that one should be required to pay for IF one wants to use it. No one is forcing people to use it – just like no one is forcing anyone to have sex.

The pro choice argument is a different one altogether. There was a court case in 1973 called Roe v Wade.  In it, the supreme court of the United States decided (7-2) that a woman’s right to an abortion was covered in the constitution under the “right to privacy.” It’s important here to remember what is required in government to overturn a court decision — either an amendment to the constitution (which requires 2/3 vote of both house and senate with 3/4 of the state legislatures also approving) or the supreme court overturning the previous decision of itself. Both of these things are certainly unlikely circumstances. This would basically mean that an overwhelming majority of the nation would have to support a complete ban on abortion or the supreme court would have to be overwhelmingly conservative (remember roe v wade was 7-2 PRO abortion rights). It would be a slow and predictable process — not one that would happen overnight.

Of the people in the United States (CNN POLL) 58% of people oppose all or almost all abortions. Let that number sink in.  Among the rest of respondents, only 26% think abortion should be legal in all circumstances. That leaves another 16% in the middle. And this is CNN’s poll … I say this to paint the picture of America that actually exists – not the one that the left wants you to think exists. I am not going to go into my personal view on abortion here (as I will in a separate post)but will stay on topic.

As far as women choosing when to have a baby — in any case of pregnancy (excluding rape and endangerment of the mother’s life) women are in complete control of when to have a baby.  Consensual sex is the mechanism through which that happens … no one is forcing anyone to have sex.  If they do — that’s a crime. In the cases of rape, incest, or endangerment of the life of the mother anyone with a sound mind would grant rights of the pregnancy to the mother alone.

Second, the pro LGBTQ rights group.  I’m not sure how the LGBTQ rights got lumped in with women’s rights but, regardless, let’s address this.  Gay marriage, again, was a decision of the United States supreme court — meaning that a similar process that is discussed above would have to occur to overturn this decision. (For an interesting insight as to why this decision was harmful please see HERE.) Also, as an aside, many people give the president credit for this type of court decision – the only way the president affects these things is through nominating supreme court justices. This points back to the notion that the president AND the senate are involved with selecting justices … which means the American people are influencing this process directly.  Here is the kicker — if you remember watching Trump’s speech at the RNC he actually championed gay rights and indicated he’s a supporter of the LGBTQ community.  I strongly doubt he would nominate a supreme court justice that would help overturn the court’s decision in that area. It would also be unpopular with 61% of Americans for gay marriage. SOURCE

Image Credit: Reuters

Third, presidential cabinet “selections”.  I use quotations there because all of the women that I spoke with referred to the cabinet NOMINEES as “selections” or “appointees”.  It is important to make the distinction because this type of language indicates a misunderstanding of the constitutional role of the president. He (or she) nominates people and the senate must approve of them with a vote. I say that because it is important to remember that, even after a presidential election, our principles of checks and balances is still working. The president is not a dictator and limits on his power are built into our country. If you are concerned with the nominees themselves, I can understand that – I’m just writing here to point out that’s not about women’s rights. Moreover – two of the four women described concern over Betsy Devos for department of education … last I checked she’s a woman …. and a billionaire. So it can’t be just about women’s rights here. That, however, doesn’t mean she’s not to be criticized.

Fourth, three of the four women interviewed referred to loss of rights because both the congress and president were all conservative.  This is actually the most informing of all the given reasons for this march … why? Because it’s not actually pro anything — it’s against the party in power. Given the reasons listed above, it doesn’t really seem like the march was for women’s rights so much as it was against the party in power. And I’m not saying that’s wrong at all … but let’s just call it what it is.  So let’s also cover that really quickly.

Fifth, Equal pay for equal work.  This has been a myth that has been debunked by many studies. And this statement still doesn’t seem to sway some people.  Please hear me out. There are many sets of data that suggest that women in general do not get paid what men get paid.  Please think deeper into this and do not stop there.  First, it is illegal for business to discriminate based on sex already.  Secondly, the data referenced by those perpetuating the pay gap myth does not account for job tenure, occupation type, hours worked, or experience. This is why it has been proven that women that graduate from college with no difference in experience than men actually get paid slightly more, on average, than their male counterparts. (sources available HERE) Additionally, single women in large cities actually get paid more than men (SOURCE). Lastly, please recognize that, based on raw principles of economics, if businesses were really getting away with paying women 20% less money than men for the same work — don’t you think businesses would really only hire women? Why spend the extra 20% on men if you can get the same out of women? The answer is they don’t because no real pay gap exists. (SOURCE) If you don’t want to take the time to read the data — see the Prager University video below.

US citizens have a right (and duty) to advocate for what they believe in. If that advocation is protest, so be it. But let’s take note of who the major organizers of the protest were.

  • 1) George Soros (leftist globalist billionaire)
  • 2) Linda Sarsour (leftist anti-Semitic leader who is pro sharia law)
  • 3) Planned Parenthood
  • 4) Tamika Mallory (co founder of Al Sharpton’s national action network)
  • 5) Carmen Perez (NYC Justice League and NAACP award recipient)

If this list of organizers doesn’t clue you into the underpinnings of this protest I don’t know what will.  My overall point in writing this is to get you to see that this march was simply not about women and if there is any concern about policy changes, it is exaggerated because it is very unlikely to change in the near future. …. and if any policies did change …. they would be subject to the oversight of the US supreme court (which has already indicated its positions) and, most importantly, the American people. We are in no different place than we were before.

I am also writing this in hopes of reaching you who did support this march either knowingly or not … Do not allow the people pushing this agenda on you to stop you from achieving the life you want to live.  People on the left are always telling you what you can’t do and who is supposedly stopping you from doing it.  It is disempowering you from controlling your own life.  There are no barriers stopping you from taking control of your life.  Don’t fall into the trap of blaming other people for your problems … if you have a problem and blame it on someone else you’re taking away the power you already have to fix it — and believe me … you can do anything you set your mind to. Just like men can. — that’s equality. That’s America.

4 Comments on “The “Women’s March”

  1. Hello! I marched in Manchester UK and thought I would share some of the reasons we marched- I can only speak on behalf of the men and women I spoke to that day obviously and my friends.

    I think first and foremost we see Trump as a bully and wanted to show our disgusy against someone who talks about women in such dismissive tones. Anyone with a position in power has a responsibility to educate and lead people in a respectful tone. They set an example and for my friends and I we were saying “this tone should not be the norm! This is not okay behaviour!” Maybe because we are just so damn British but honestly, we just couldn’t imagine someone who talks with such vulgar about “grabbing women”… well it’s just ugly, trashy and not polite.. being given any kind of job, let alone being elected to POTUS. To further this sentiment – As we stood and marched we were heckled by a drunk stag do who shouted things about the way we looked and things they would do to us “stupid women”, a photo of me with my sign was picked up by the media and the comments underneath the article echoed that of the stag do. Thus showing how much work needed to be done still. So, I think we were marching in solidarity with anyone worried about his tone and by having someone legitimising treating women in a really second class way. If he can’t actually change laws (re your article) then that’s one thing, but it’s not taking into consideration his views and tone will have on society. The girl feeling embarrassed about going for contraception already, now feeling it’s a sin… the abused woman now having to legitimise the already painful decision of getting an abortion, the woman who doesn’t speak up when her boss says he will “grab her by the pussy” or the people trying to fight for decency getting shouted at and trolled wondering “should I even bother if it makes me feel vulnerable”.

    I really enjoyed your article and it made me feel a bit more positive about things not coming into play- but I worry about the social impact.

    • Caroline – thanks for the comment! First of all I enjoy the hell out of all the British spellings! My reply might be sort of lengthy but I’m going to try to keep it short.

      First – I need to make it clear that you are right – the language that Donald Trump has used in the past is not ok and almost all conservatives made it VERY clear that they think the same thing. I do not support that language and I don’t feel that way towards women.

      Second – I didn’t say that he can’t change laws. I said he can’t change laws on his own … the president has a lot of power to influence the direction and enforcement of policy. The beautiful thing about America is that our constitution limits that power and ensures that the people must indirectly sign off on any changes he may want to make. In that regard — our policies ensuring legal equality of the sexes will remain sound.

      With that out of the way I think your comment actually speaks to the dissatisfaction you and many friends feel about American politics as a whole – not JUST Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton certainly didn’t have a true record of helping women. She actively worked to ruin the reputation of many women during her husband’s presidency – and that’s not debatable it’s a fact. That certainly is the definition of bullying. Many other presidents in history have exhibited bad behavior when it comes to women. Kennedy, LBJ, Bill Clinton etc etc. Not that any of that excuses bad behavior on either side. Donald Trump has since apologized for his words — and overall saying things like that isn’t as bad as actually doing it …. I’m sure we’d all agree there. The question is what is it about these people that people are attracted to? Is it personality type? Assertiveness? I’m actually not sure — but I don’t think that people simply accept the person or candidate as a whole but rather pick and choose the things they like and weigh them against their dislikes. I think it’s about prioritization.

      The only thing to do in this instance is judge a person by their actions – I think he has supported many women through his businesses and on his political campaign team. All of this really boils down to what he actually does as president. Does he create a world where everyone (women included) can succeed — and do so more easily? Does he conduct himself in a way that represents American values? That’s up to you to decide and for us to vote on … I am not going to defend poor behavior from anyone. The only thing is to point out hypocrisy when you see it — and there is a lot of that with the political preferences of many people and many women in the Women’s March. Why aren’t those people protesting for women’s rights in areas of the world where they physically suffer daily? Where are the marches for subjugated women everywhere? Countries like the USA and the U.K. are unique in that they are free – no one is held back no matter what anyone says. We have laws that ensure this and the vast majority of people polled in the US believe in equality of the sexes — over 88% … while 82% of Americans do not consider themselves a feminist. That’s very interesting.

      Please don’t misunderstand — I said it in the post and I mean it — people can and should try to change policy if they feel that their interests are not being represented. Sometimes a protest helps start that movement. My issue was not with the protest — it was with the lack of a true link to any reduction in Women’s rights. And the fact that someone said something disparaging about women – in private – doesn’t actually affect anyone’s rights. Now I still agree with you that it is bad behavior — and everyone here in America (and apparently in the U.K. as well) has made that very clear.

      We can and should call out ANY and ALL leaders that show bad behavior on any front — and I will continue to call those as I see them. I was not a Donald Trump supporter at the beginning of the republican primary, but overall I’m happy we have him in office vs the alternative.

      I really appreciate your feedback and hope you’ll continue to respond to all of the posts.

  2. Crap, I really did ramble in my 5 gin and tonics down original post. Thanks for your reply.

    Look how quickly you point the finger and say ‘Hillary is a bad person too!’ that’s kind of how Donald conducted his whole campaign. I’m not really interested in Hillary or anyone else, comparing one to the other is indifferent now and I agree, Hillary is certainly no saint at all.

    I actually disagree with you on ‘saying things like that isn’t as bad as actually doing it’ because saying things encourages and normalises it. It goes back to the whole ‘if women don’t want to get raped then they shouldn’t wear short skirts and get drunk’ argument rather than ‘if women don’t want to get raped then we need to drill it into young men that this is fucking appalling, it’s not a joke and if you do it, think it or even locker room joke about it you’re a disgusting animal who should have his testicles sliced off and pickled’ … well, maybe I got a bit carried away there but you see what I mean. So for example I was at a party recently and I was sat with 8 girls and one guy, we were talking about ‘that’ Robin Thicke song… and then I’m not sure how we got onto it but we all recalled that in our life we had been either abused, raped, forced upon or groped by a man, or made to feel really really vulnerable. The one man in the group was shocked; and only then really got why that song was so inappropriate – because this stuff is happening to almost every woman I know and men are making songs about it and playing it off as only being a bit of fun… normalising it and therefore perpetuating it. We marched for all those women across the world who the same thing had happened to. So, yes you’re right, he apologised for it and the republicans said he was a bad man but now I’m keen to see how serious he was about that apology and how he plans to put that right.

    RE Fighting for women’s rights around the world; actually I think that was a tone to the protest rally I was at. How can we expect the middle east to realise that women aren’t property they own who they can stone to death etc etc if the more free countries like USA are run by men who talk about women without respect? You’re right, we should be getting angry about Saudi’s treatment of women – but one protest doesn’t negate the other.

    Or, there is always the possibility that we were all on our menstrual cycle at the same time and needed to vent some of our mentalness which makes us clumsy and get distracted by kittens.*

    Let’s see where Donald takes us – our petition in the UK just reached 2m to stop him coming to our country for a state visit which means they will debate it in Parliament on the 20th Feb – will make for interesting viewing!

    * this is english sarcasm

    • Few closing point.

      First – I only bring up Hillary in the spirit of intellectual honesty. When we find ourselves in the situation where the primary system gave us these two candidates for final choices – you have to evaluate them both on equal terms. It would be intellectually dishonest to focus your criticism on only one person and not the other — in this case the shoe fits on both. In that same vein – do you think there would be any protests for Hillary? Not a chance — and I think that also reflects some level of dishonestly in evaluation.

      Second – I just disagree about the words over actions argument – while I understand and somewhat agree that speaking of something like this may “normalise” it – you have to remember that people have their own minds and they are responsible for their own actions. Most people aren’t just sheep. I also think your comparison of victim blaming is a bit out of place. I would never advocate such things.

      Third – I don’t think that a protest such as this “negates” a protest for another cause of women — my own point in mentioning it is that there is absolutely no link between the suffering of subjugated women across the globe in autocratic, theocratic, and or communist governments to the words and behaviors of Donald Trump. The only behavior that may affect that situation is his conduct and policy as President of the United States. I also don’t think that a women’s rights protest in America or the U.K. would do anything at all for women’s rights in Saudi Arabia, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc etc — the only way to get the middle east to recognize this is to promote modernization of their religion and culture INSIDE of their countries. That’s a topic for another day.

      Fourth – I will be following the debate in the UK next month — even though the PM and the Queen herself have already indicated that they will work with President Trump and are happy to have him. The contingency of people that voted for your withdrawal from the EU seem to also support President Trump — and that seems to be a majority in your country, yes?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *