Skip to main content

Women's Rights and Imagined Slights



President Trump has said some inexcusable things about women and has bragged about doing some inexcusable things to/with women.  I roundly condemn his words and actions for the repulsive and deeply offensive things they are.  I teach my girls not to give the time of day to any boys with such attitudes about women, and I teach my son never to indulge such attitudes himself.

This post isn't about that.

Instead, it's about why (mostly Democrat) women are protesting in massive numbers in the streets around the country today.  Do they have a right to speak their mind and protest whatever they choose?  Absolutely!  And just what is it they're upset enough to travel and march together about?
Here's a short video outlining their reasons, from their own publicity materials (sorry, Blogger won't let me embed video directly from a non Youtube url...grr):

1. I want to feel safe at school - I can't tell where the emphasis should be here: on the physical safety or on the feeling of safety.  No one, not even a president of the US, can change your feelings one way or another, because those are yours alone to manage, even as a child.  But if it's BEING physically safe at school that you'd like, what about a Trump presidency would threaten that?  Do you honestly believe Trump wants children not to be safe at school?  I get that your irrational fear of a tool that deserves respect for its ability to kill instantaneously at a range might make you worry about Trump's stance on guns in schools, but when you can allow rationality to govern your thinking on the topic, you'll find that you're much safer with trained officers and teachers defending you armed with the same ranged weapon of instaneous death as the would-be perpetrators of such violence are.  For those concerned about reducing gun violence in schools, you should applaud his inauguration, because his policy is likely to do just that.

2. Because I'm a feminist and that's not a dirty word - For many women it is, but even if you define feminism broadly as a movement supporting equality of opportunity under the law for women, what about a Trump presidency would threaten that?  Do you honestly believe Trump wants to take America's women rights to self-determinacy away?  On equality of pay as an example issue, you should applaud his inauguration, because he agrees with you.

3. Because my life matters (black woman), and my life matters (black woman with British accent), and so does hers (East Asian woman pointing to her unborn child) - First of all, it's curiously hypocritical of them to insist an unborn child's life matters when the march specifically excluded pro-life groups who have been saying that for at least 44 years now.  Secondly, what about a Trump presidency would threaten that?  Do you honestly believe Trump intends to enforce the law differently or deny your constitutional rights based on your race?  If you want your visible minority group to gain in prosperity and opportunity in an environment of peace and security, you should be applauding Trump's inauguration, because he agrees with you.

4. Because a bathroom doesn't define me (a transgender male) - If the bathroom wasn't important to how you define yourself or how you want to be defined by others, why did you so carefully and expensively recraft your body and have doctors perform extensive operations to alter your body to fit the physical norms you think correspond to those very same bathrooms?  There would be no fight to open up access to bathrooms to any new class of people if the definition implied by access to that bathroom weren't of CENTRAL importance to your desired projection of identity.  Because bathrooms define you, you fight tooth and nail to claim access to your preferred bathroom as a fundamental human right.  But aside from the baldfaced distortion in the assertion, I ask again: what about a Trump presidency would threaten that?  Do you honestly believe Trump wants to dictate bathroom policy?  You should be applauding his inauguration, not protesting, because he agrees with you.

5. Because diversity is beautiful - Who disagrees with that?  Not Trump, whose inaugural address you should applaud for at least these lines:
It is time to remember that old wisdom our soldiers will never forget: that whether we are black or brown or white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots, we all enjoy the same glorious freedoms, and we all salute the same great American Flag.
And whether a child is born in the urban sprawl of Detroit or the windswept plains of Nebraska, they look up at the same night sky, they fill their heart with the same dreams, and they are infused with the breath of life by the same almighty Creator.
6. Because my grandmother fought for the right to vote (black woman) - I'm going to let the above quote stand and just assert that Trump seeks to deny no woman or person of any color the right to vote, except in cases where a court has stripped a felon of that right in consequence of their proven criminal actions.

7. Because I came from a family of immigrants. I don't know where I would be if they weren't afforded that opportunity - So did Trump!  And if you want to preserve opportunities for immigrants to thrive in this nation because they've come through the front door in compliance with our laws, ready to integrate into our society and contribute as full partners with American citizens, having a pathway to citizenship for themselves and their children, then you should applaud the inauguration of Trump because he agrees with you.

8. Because women deserve equal pay for equal work, duh. - Already dealt with.  Your protest movement is not looking like its substance is very contrary to Trump's positions, at this point.

9. Because of my moms - Again, key question: what about a Trump presidency do you think would threaten that?  Do you honestly believe Trump wishes to deny consenting adults of their right to cohabitate, and to care for children with full legal protection under family law?  If that's what you want, you should be applauding the inauguration of Trump, because he agrees with you.

10. This country has always been about freedom (muslim woman in hijab) - While a worry about the ban on new muslim immigration and registry for Muslims he proposed during the campaign is rational, it is no longer substantial, and comes from a place of confusion on his ideas in the first place.  Trump's focus is not on Islam, but on RADICAL Islam, is not on law-abiding citizens of any religion, but about security screening for terrorists potentially infiltrating the US under cover of asylum seeking, as they publicly stated they would do.  On the other hand, if what you're after is a place where citizens of all religions and backgrounds can enjoy freedom and prosperity together, you should applaud the inauguration of Trump, who agrees with you in the following words:
At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to the United States of America, and through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other.
When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice.
11. Because no means no - I have no personal love for Trump.  I've done work in this post to undo the  irrational romanticization of imagined threats he poses to human rights, women's rights especially, but Trump's heinous remarks about touching private parts without permission are despicable.  To the extent this man normalizes a machismo that promotes sexual assault in any degree, I join WITH the protesters to decry him.  I wish a woman who has been assaulted in this way, if any were, would come forward with proof and formally charge him so that he can face justice, as we all should for similar crimes.  At the moment, however, he is as yet uncharged with any such crimes, and we must proceed as if his braggadocio was baseless, since he is innocent until proven guilty as are we all, even if the charges are serious.

12. Because I want to smash the glass ceiling - By all means go even further than KellyAnn Conway!

13. 'Cause I want to be president one day - You go girl!  No one, least of all Trump, is stopping you! (Although, if recent history serves, I'd suggest running as a Republican.  Democrats don't seem to elect their women to such high office.)

14. Because I want to march forward, not backward (actress, non historian) - Don't worry, Trump can't reverse chronology.  You're safe in that regard.  However, if by that you mean that you want him to endorse your interpretation of how history progresses, you may be in for a few disappointments, but no substantial reversals of civil rights.

15. Because I want my voice to be heard (another celebrity, I think) - I hear you!  And while it's not a constitutional right to be HEARD, you can rest assured that your right to SPEAK and express protest (or anything else) in any way you choose as long as it doesn't deny others their similar rights is AOK with Trump, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't stop your march.

16. Because I'm not scared of bullies (Chelsea Handler, potty-mouthed nude selfie instagrammer who regularly verbally bullies people who don't think like her because she's a brash comedian) - and long may both you and your haters exercise your right to verbally abuse whoever you please, in all its glorious crassness and obscenity for whatever fee your cable channel wishes to charge for as long as subscribers will freely pay for it.  Trump certainly won't stand in your way.  I won't subscribe, but I won't stand in your way either.

17. Because I can't breathe - You should definitely see a doctor about that, not Trump.

18. Because love wins - Wait.  Are you citing Trump?  Sounds similar in sentiment to his inaugural speech's closing paragraphs, among which the following (emphasis mine):
Your voice, your hopes, and your dreams will define our American destiny. And your courage and goodness and love will forever guide us along the way.
19. If I can march, so can you (handicapped person, chronologically enhanced) - Yes, but I choose not to.  Of 19 points you promote as reasons to march, only 1 or 2 have a truthful leg to stand on against what Trump actually promotes as policy.  In reality, you're not protesting substance, you're a symptom of the media's scary power to make you believe the illusions it thinks will serve the kind of division it needs, not just for the sale of its services, but for the Liberalism it promotes.  Your critique is all sound and fury, signifying nothing, but serving a divisive, centralizing, authoritarian, elitist agenda.

If you want power back, people, then conservativism--and to the extent Trump supports that, then Trump's presidency--is your best bet.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond the term “identity”

I didn't want to become one of those grad students who takes forever to find out what he wants to study, so I entered the Masters program at PITT with an idea what I wanted to do as a dissertation: national identity in the Ivory Coast. It sounds like a straightforward enough concept, but I encountered an article while I was taking a history course which looked at several case studies of the construction of racial, ethnic, and gender identities over a variety of geographical locations and historical periods that made me radically re-think the entire concept of identity . It's a concept that makes intuitive sense to most people, I would imagine. It means who you are, right? The layperson could also probably understand quite readily that there seem to be many different levels at which our "identity" can be determined or constrained. A black person may feel more of a racial component to identity than a white person, for example. My religious identity takes primacy over my...

Abortion "Complexities" and Morality

It's just not that hard, folks.  Unless we're dealing with the context of a justified war, there's simply no moral defense for killing innocent humans if there are any other options, let alone for the convenience of the living.  And while both sides may exaggerate to make a point, only one side of the argument does insane logical backflips to hide the true and morally repugnant nature of the acts, their numbers, their consequences, and the assumptions underlying their "justifications". Ever since the leaked Alito draft hinting that Roe v. Wade was about to be overturned, pro-abortion activists have had their day.  I suppose I can understand a certain need to defend against what they perceive as a threat on their liberties and rights.  So now that they've had their time to externalize their fears and put out ad campaigns, and fake being handcuffed at protests in unlawful locations, let's stand back from the emotions and just examine the core moral argument...

Historical Malpractice

  Heather Cox Richardson is a favorite among some of my leftist friends.  Her position as an academic offers imprimatur for her wanton partisanship and her acumen as a historical researcher helps her find the cherry-picked details she needs to cover a false narrative with a veneer of historicity.  I don't usually engage because her posts are long enough that it would take too much unpacking to deal with, but I wanted to take a crack at just a part of this one. Keep in mind that her schtick consist mostly of framing modern Republicans as morally corrupt and modern Democrats as knights in shining armor for all that is good and right, by peppering her argument with so much actual historical facts that you have the feeling of "context" so you don't notice the logical sleight of hand by which her narrative escapes reason and reality.  With that said, here's my summary, responding in snarky kind to her own partisan framing, but faithful to the content of her...