What is the womens march trying to achieve?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/womens-march-washington-can-get-involved/ [first hit]

I'm a bit confused by this march that's going on - as in, what the end goal is. Do women really think that the new administration don't comprehend women rights?

• It can't be about removing Trump from office - that's not a viable outcome.
• It can't be about gaining rights - they already have rights.
• Is it about further awareness? I don't understand what rights they think people are not aware of...

Could someone let me know?
[Apologies if something along this line has been posted already]

 

It makes them "feel" better about Hillary getting stuffed.

 

Somehow I doubt that Hillary's been 'stuffed' in a few years....

 

It is a popcorn fart.

 

Welllllllllll . . . yesterday a CNN news host taunted a Right of Center woman concerned about ROC issues and women by saying (paraphrased) "The women's march isn't about women it's about liberalism."

So I take it that aside from being something that George Soros underwrote for the DNC it is a SHRIEK of hysterical rage over the Left being essentially out of political power in this nation except for some traditional Dem Party enclave cities and tiny regions. It's about nothing more than a relatively tiny radical minority roaring just as loud as they can FOR the sake of roaring and also to con other women into thinking that they not only are a massive movement but that they somehow represent the average woman. But again as that CNN host let slip the reality is that "The women's march isn't about women it's about liberalism."

 

Staging a grass roots protest that easily outdrew the Inaugration was an accomplishment in itself.

 

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...arch-linda-sarsour-pro-sharia-law-ties-hamas/
https://milo.yiannopoulos.net/2017/01/womens-march-hamas/

 

Calm down they were just trying to work off some calories that they consumed eating Cheeto Snacks watching the innaugeration the day before.

 

You are correct with your analysis. Womens Rights weren't taken. They can't remove Trump. It wasn't about any further awareness other than liberal women, activists, and their Big Time donors......having a severe case of Butt-hurt-itis.

Although, Yahoo claimed it was a Triumph. They came, they walked, they (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)ed.

Some on the Right should have speakers set up all along the march with the song Feelings by Paul Anka playing. Just sayin.

 

Nothing new we get this crap all the time.

" Before the Women’s March on Washington there was the Million Woman March…and the Million Man March
Nina Agrawal
Saturday’s Women’s March on Washington was originally named the Million Woman March. But some people noted the same name was used for a march which took place in Philadelphia in 1997 and focused attention on the experience of black women in America.

Even before that there was the Million Man March in 1995. Organized by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan and former National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People head Benjamin F. Chavis Jr., the march focused on atonement and personal responsibility within the black community, especially among men. It was a contrast to civil rights marches in the past which had called for changes in society overall.. "

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na...march-on-washington-1484942715-htmlstory.html

 

Simple. The worldwide marches against trump are reminding people that trump is a lying, disgusting, unrepentant (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) grabber with no morals and that people are not going to bend over for the deplorables and their crap agenda or their great orange hope.
Trump made his bed and now he has to lie in it.

 

I think the "protests" are part of a larger goal to make President Trump an "illegitimate president" in the eyes of voters. It COULD keep him from accomplishing his or the people's goals in the next 4 years. They don't realize the strategy will backfire on them in the future. And yes, they were counting on the "butthurt" women joining them to make their numbers higher.

We will likely see these strategies pop up over the next four years. One other strategy was reporting that Trump "removed the Martin Luther King bust from the White House." The point was to try and make Trump look racist. The fact that the reporter didn't bother to check that someone was standing in front of the bust in a pic also shows it was a strategic lie. The lie was to start yet another "hands up, don't shoot" lie that would cause blacks to protest Trump. Imagine if Trump didn't catch it early and prove it to be false. But knowing Black Lives Matter, they will likely be adding the chant "MLK's bust was removed" to their protests in the future anyway.

These will surely backfire because the people are very skeptical of the mainstream media now as well as lying liberals. They keep digging their own political grave.

Steve

 

The purpose, end game, or achievement is simply to "remind" people that Trump says strange things?
I don't think they need to march for that... just wait for the next tweet. It shouldn't be long.

Seems like a waste of time if they just want to "remind" people. It was fairly fresh in the media when he was voted in, so it didn't make a difference when a difference actually counted. Of course, 42% of women voted for Trump; less % of women voted Hillary than Obama in 2012.

I'm really hoping there is a more legitimate reason for all this. Oh, well.

 

The Pointless Paranoia of the Women's Marches.....


Now I'm not talking here about the Gloria Steinems and Michael Moores, for whom protest is so much a way of life they couldn't exist without it. Or the Madonnas who, like other entertainment stalwarts, have business reasons for constantly reminding us they are still have their "edge" even as they age, liberally dropping the f-bomb and speculating about bombing the White House in the process.

I'm talking about the rest of us, especially, this weekend, a fair percentage of the women of America who descended on our nation's capital and elsewhere in impressive numbers.

Excuse me if I don't get it. What exactly was motivating them?

Oh, right, Donald Trump, that vulgar misogynist who bragged about pu**y grabbing (asterisks to dissociate myself from Madonna, even though I'm aging too). I'm going to skip over the obvious - these same women almost all ignored Bill Clinton actually doing (not just mouthing off about) similar activities in the Oval Office, not to mention on numerous other occasions, some of which we know about and some of which we may not. Further, these women didn't have much to say -- no demonstrations, no marches, maybe a few hashtags -- when radical Islamists of various stripes regularly kidnapped large numbers of women (Nigerians, Yazidis, Kurds, etc., etc.) from their homes and took them as sex slaves, often beheading them after they finished raping them. Nor did they even pipe up when honor killings were going on in their own backyard.

The success of the demonstrations in terms of size attests to the power of mutually reinforced paranoia. This paranoia is of course magnified by the extraordinarily fractured nature of our society with almost everyone living inside their own echo chamber with fears building upon themselves, much in the manner of the Salem Witch Trials.

Ironically, these women's marches are strangely behind the times in today's America and therefore largely irrelevant, though the participants may not realize or acknowledge it. More women have been going to college than men for several years and are just now surpassing them in law school as well. Hillary Clinton may have lost the election but women are well on track to win the war. Within a very few years, historically we may be living in a matriarchy of sorts. Instead of freaking out over an election, these women should relax and enjoy their coming power. It's manifested all over the Trump administration already in the persons of Kellyanne Conway (she could run for president herself -- and win) and Ivanka Trump (so could she).....snip~

https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2017/01/21/the-pointless-paranoia-of-the-womens-marches/

Pretty much says it all.

 

Well you are starting out from the wrong perspective if you want a sensible amswer; you’re making statements and then dismissing them.

It can't be about removing Trump from office - that's not a viable outcome.

Oh but it can, it’s not wise to run for office by insulting half the electorate and before you say Trump was elected, bear in mind that half the electorate didn’t or couldn’t register their vote.

• It can't be about gaining rights - they already have rights.

Well they certainly don’t have equal pay for equal work. The abortion issue is still raging in the States whereas in many European countries it was sorted years ago.
Pregnancy and after care is still a big problem for them.

• Is it about further awareness? I don't understand what rights they think people are not aware of...

It’s not only about rights as such it’s about good government. Many American women now communicate through the net with other countries. The march against Trump wasn’t confined to America; it was in many other nations too.

Information is a powerful tool i.e. when they know other women have three months paid maternity, six weeks plus paid vacation as a right and no women live in fear that illness can mean selling their home to pay the bill of medical care. They begin to wonder why in America freedom is confined to their status and the size of their bank balance.
In short they may demand a better deal.

It may fizzle out to nothing, but on the other hand it may ‘Soon shake your windows and rattle your walls’

 

It is about shaming women who choose to be mothers and housewives.

 

• Trump has been shown to use words that make him sound like sexual predator, making women feel unsafe/mistreated.
• There is a lot of legislation going through that will take away women's' rights. They'd like to raise awareness for that.
• Trump's tax plan is going to hit single parents hardest, particularly women.

I'm sure I could think of others. And Trump could totally get impeached, so your first point is totally false.

- - - Updated - - -

Where on earth did you get that?

 

The march was nothing but a bunch of unhinged liberals throwing a fit like spoiled rotten children that didn't get what they wanted

 

If you are serious and want to know what the Women's March is all about, read the below link. If you are just yanking a partisan chain and don't wish to learn anything, ignore the link.

https://www.womensmarch.com/

 

like all liberal bs, it can just be ignored (for at least the next 4 years, and probably for a lot longer than that. They will do nothing, cause NOW, cops are going to have orders to bust heads and take names if anyone gets violent.

 

I think it's about venting.

Read a great thought about this elsewhere, though: "In just one day Trump had thousands of fat women out there walking. Michelle Obama couldn't do that in 8 years."

 

Soros and the other liberal money behind the movement was all about advancing an image and a narrative, that the country revolted against the new Trump administration. This is intended to harm his legitimacy and credibility.

As for the women marching? Left-wing women and/or feminists, just doing their part. They bought into the narratives against Trump, and likely had nothing better to do. Many on the left see themselves as social justice warriors, and this was just one example.

 

Obama words and actions made him sound like a anti-Semite and ant-Christian making Jews and Christians feel unsafe/mistreated
Obama introduced a law that took away everyone's right the right to choose to have health insurance or not and what kind of health insurance to buy
Obama tax plan and Obama care hit every parent single of not the hardest

 

From a facebook feed filled with women irate about the Women's March people acting like they speak for them or represent their values or interests mostly.

 

I'm making suggestive statements because it's the only reasons I could think of [which is why I put my question out here]. And I'm dismissing them because they don't seem valid, to me - but perfectly acceptable to validate the reasons if possible.

It might not be wise, but I don't see the end results of this march being able to removing the POTUS.... and the march doesn't appear to be about those who didn't vote so I'm unclear where that comes from. If you were eligible to vote and didn't, you really don't have a say IMO.

I have never seen a job being advertised at one level of pay for men, and another for women. It's equal. What may not appear equal is if women go on maternity leave for extended periods and come back and lose out on promotions because they don't have the same experience in a role that someone does who didn't go on maternity leave. This isn't particularly a gender issue; If two women start in the same role with the same experience and one of them leaves on extended maternity whilst the other continues to gain job experience, it seems fair that the person with more experience wins the next job offer. I concur that men are more likely to be in that position though.

The abortion issue is still raging and the pregnancy and after care is still a big problem, so if the marches are about that we would have seen the protests before Trump was here. Did we? I can't recall!

Good government isn't about being a woman, which this march seems to be all about. Good, or bad, government affects all. The march being in the US or other countries still doesn't tell me what they want to achieve.

So it's as much to do with Trump as it has to do with Obama's last 8 years; were there similar marches during Obama's term? I can't recall...

I just want to figure out what the protesters want as an outcome to the protests.