The media told us there was a historic event across the
country and around the world this past Saturday. Women came out, in
extraordinary numbers, to march about….
I’m not sure.
As a strong woman friend, who didn’t attend, said on
Facebook, “The whole point of a protest is to educate those who don't know
anything about what it is about. I was left completely clueless.”
A confusing poster from the Women's March found on a friend's Facebook, original source unknown |
I know a few women who participated. Young, educated,
successful women. Women who have made their career choices, or are staying home
with beautiful children while their husband pursues career goals that support
the whole family. That’s anecdotal, I know. I just don’t happen to know any
downtrodden, marginalized women who participated. But I assume in crowds that
big, there were some.
But I’m confused about their message. Women around the world
were protesting the election of a US President they don’t like? When the
alternative was a catastrophically bad choice? That seems unlikely.
So, if we broaden out the purpose(s) for this solidarity
march, maybe it’s about pushing a progressive (tyrannist), social justice
(fascist) agenda that happens to be led by people who identify as female for
now.
To anonymously quote one of my Facebook friends who attended in her city:
My earlier post only mentioned it was a reaction to a
misogynistic president (which it definitely was), but it also was a
pro-immigrant, pro-racial equality, pro-LGBTQIA rights, pro-environment, and
pro-healthcare accessibility demonstration as well. Everyone marched for their
own reasons, but it did expand beyond just feminism yesterday.
She linked to this Reuters article, which claims the activists were “outraged
by Trump's campaign rhetoric and behavior they found to be especially
misogynistic.” This is the very next day after the inauguration, and the event
was in planning stages for some time, so it is not about either his rhetoric or
behavior as president. Their timing, therefore, is a bit off; the campaign is
over.
Another clever person made a comparison to NFL football
following yesterday’s games:
I refuse to accept the results of the
AFC & NFC Championship games. Tomorrow I’ll be protesting, picketing,
looting, rioting, and forming support groups. Contact me privately for details.
#NotMySuperBowl NFLMemes on Facebook
So, there’s the timing problem. Then, it is difficult to
believe people are outraged about distasteful, disgusting things the
now-president has said or done in the past when they show up costumed as their
own genitalia. Signs they carry are some combination of vile, offensive,
profane, or just stupid.
Video here, if you care to see; I’d rather not
reproduce those images on my blog. But here's a photo of the leftover detritus.
The leftover detritus photo credit Ben Ferguson |
Then there’s the irony related to solidarity.
This Occupy-Wall-Street-sponsored, Planned-Parenthood-funded
march attempted to exclude pro-life women.
A piece on Lifesite News, by Kelsey Kurtinitis, two days ahead
of the march, starts out, “I am a woman, and yet the Women’s March on
Washington does not represent me.” Later in the piece Kurtinitis explains,
According to their mission statement, they aim to “join in
diversity” while sending “a bold message to our new government on their first
day in office, and to the world that women’s rights are human rights.”…
All of these well-intentioned statements might have at least
maintained consistency if they had not then immediately violated their very own
mission statement.
Yesterday, the Women’s March organization made headlines by
removing New Wave Feminists, a pro-life women’s group, as an official event
sponsor. The Women’s March released a statement to defend their decision,
apologizing for “the error” of having previously listed an “anti-choice” group
as a partner. They also made it clear that they only wish to march on behalf of
those who share the pro-abortion mindset.
So, women who “choose” life for children are not “woman”
enough to qualify for the Women’s March. Hmm. Given pressure, organizers
backtracked and decided to grudgingly allow participation from women who believe
in giving birth to babies rather than killing them in the womb. For some reason
that doesn’t win me over.
There has been some pushback. Some women explain why they didn’t
join the march, while others respond with why they were wrong not to join. Some
claim the definition of feminism has been hijacked, and others say the
definition means anything and everything.
Conservative Review had a piece last September about the
failure of modern feminism:
Like most progressive movements, modern feminism purports to
laud equality, tolerance, and freedom of expression as its primary goals. The
truth, however, is that feminism promotes two unappealing visions of equality,
neither of which could be considered “tolerant.”
Some feminists have attempted to reach equality by disarming
and devaluing men. For these women, equality demands that the status and
intrinsic worth of men be lowered for the sake of female liberation,
independence, and “leveling the playing field.” This is the “fight the
patriarchy” and “the future is female” group.
An alternative and more radical form of modern feminism
asserts that equality demands total transcendence of sexual and all other
differences—complete uniformity in role, in pay, and, consequently, in
perceived value. This view not only attacks men, but any person whose beliefs
or values challenge the progressive feminist agenda. I call this camp the
“feminist fascists.”
I have good friends who are willing to use the term feminism, and then define it themselves.
They usually mean they want equal pay for equal work—usually unaware that women
already have this, because they hear soundbites rather than look at data. [Pew Research points out that nearly all pay differences can be traced to women’s
choices.] Sometimes they mean they want
women to have the opportunity to pursue whatever work they want to do, as long
as they are capable—again, unaware that women are more likely to graduate from
high school, more likely to go to college [52% since 2010, according to UN statistics], and are more likely to be hired over
a man to avoid accusations of sexism.
These sisters mean well. I don’t really have a quarrel with
them. But I’ve been around long enough to know how the word has been used for
many decades to mean anti-female. Women don’t gain more rights as women by
denying their womanhood and acting like uncivilized men.
So I don’t ever describe myself as a feminist. And it never
occurred to me to join in this meaningless march.
What did I do instead? I attended a funeral to celebrate the
life of a beautiful, energetic, humanity-serving woman I had the privilege to
know during the last few of her 78 years. Then I spoke at our local Tea Party
meeting, outlining our legislative priorities during the session that just got
underway here in Texas. (No one at the meeting talked about the march, or even
mentioned the inauguration; we’re on to doing what we need to do next.) Then I
went and played some music with friends. And then I went home to share a quiet evening watching a movie with Mr. Spherical Model, because sometimes being a woman living a very full life is not only enough, it's exhausting.
No comments:
Post a Comment