Women's March Largest in U.S History

[pr126]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VqtE4ZddZc

[Munch]

Please, if it was 1903 you would be bitching about those damn women causing a ruckus...probably lamenting that the officers had to dirty their uniforms in removing these unlawful morons because of their disorderly conduct. Don't act like radical opinions and violence in a protest magically appeared a generation ago.

Considering if it were that time, you wouldn't even have a voice to speak out about it, so just as well we don't live in those time now isn't it?
This march was a disorganized mess, laboured with opportunistic rabble-rousers, violence, misopportunities, and as the woman side in the video, it was clearly made to celebrate Hillary prematurely before it was even announced she won. Your being very indicative of someone who wanted it to mean more then it did, because if it was about fighting for women's rights in a country that has women's rights in place, why didn't any of it talk about the suffering of women in less privileged countries as America.

Nothing will change from this protest, because the things these people were screaming about on that day, are already law in America.

[Baruch]

A key insight!  That this was already planned, as a victory parade for Hillary, and they had to change their plans.  Sorry gals ... better candidate next time.  Tulsi Gabbard is a Democrat with some guts.

[Shiranu]

[ quote] This march was a disorganized mess... [/quote]

Reality says otherwise considering how well regarded it's been considered, but once again since you only have eyes to the very worst and don't see the forest for the trees... I can see how you come to that conclusion.

The fact you think it was fighting to gain women's rights showa you don't actually have a single clue about what you are actually talking about...

[Munch]

[ quote] This march was a disorganized mess...

Reality says otherwise considering how well regarded it's been considered, but once again since you only have eyes to the very worst and don't see the forest for the trees... I can see how you come to that conclusion.

The fact you think it was fighting to gain women's rights showa you don't actually have a single clue about what you are actually talking about...

That's the thing with echo chambers, simply telling one another what you did was a success, doesn't necessarily make it so. Have things improved after this march? Has trump been beaten? Are republicans nicer people?

What did you hope this would achieve, beside knocking over some trash cans?

[Shiranu]

That's the thing with echo chambers, simply telling one another what you did was a success, doesn't necessarily make it so.

That's the thing with echo chambers, simply telling one another that what someone did was a failure and only looking at sources that agree, doesn't necessarily make it so.

Funny how that works both ways.

Have things improved after this march? Has trump been beaten? Are republicans nicer people?

Yes, no, no.

What did you hope this would achieve, beside knocking over some trash cans?

What does any protest achieve? Very few make a direct impact, especially without violence. But what they do do is reinforce a mentality of solidarity, that there are other people who are pissed off and want to see things change, creates chances to network, gets people talking about the issue. It shows an act of defiance, it pisses people off who disagree (like the Yarn Store saying they don't want women who participated to be customers) and makes them expose themselves so they can be boycotted and lets you know that you don't want your money going to their bigotry. It brings people together.

The intangible effects are just as important, if not more so, than the tangible.

The fact that museums are clamoring to get exhibits from the largest march in U.S. history also kinda says it was a big deal.

Btw, American Scientists are planning to do the exact same thing in response to the gag-order. It will likely be just as successful in your opinion (that is to say, not at all at changing anything). Are you going to start calling the scientists what they are as well (a bunch of disorganized messes of opportunists and rabble risers)... or since it's a  group you approve of are they okay?

[Baruch]

That's the thing with echo chambers, simply telling one another what you did was a success, doesn't necessarily make it so. Have things improved after this march? Has trump been beaten? Are republicans nicer people?

What did you hope this would achieve, beside knocking over some trash cans?

They were ladies.  Unlike the property breaking and torching anarchists the day of the inauguration.

Most US scientists, are government employees ... directly or indirectly thru grants.  If we are going to be partisan, and follow the spoils system, then all Democrat scientists lose their grant money or government job ... on change of administration.  Or maybe we shouldn't make science, partisan to begin with.

[GrinningYMIR]

Social justic is strong here.

I agree with munch, good in principle, hijakced by rabble rousers and madonnas to be something innefective and even more polarizing.

[Munch]

Social justic is strong here.

I agree with munch, good in principle, hijakced by rabble rousers and madonnas to be something innefective and even more polarizing.

Yep, along with the face of said march being of a woman who wants sharia law in the west, a law that would make this march non-existent

[Mermaid]

Interesting to read this thread as a fly on the wall. It's great to hear men chiming in with disapproval. I see the focus is all on how the women behaved and the pink hats and lack of class (lol!), and not on the absolutely monstrous, racist, sexist, undiplomatic, reactionary, mentally ill xenophobic vulgarian in the white house.

Is it possible to stop and think for a moment about why all those women might be upset?

By the way Munch, you cannot possibly attribute violence to the women's marches last Saturday. Millions of women marched peacefully. Do you have any reason to mention violence while discussing how you disapprove of this movement?

[Mermaid]

Btw, American Scientists are planning to do the exact same thing in response to the gag-order. It will likely be just as successful in your opinion (that is to say, not at all at changing anything). Are you going to start calling the scientists what they are as well (a bunch of disorganized messes of opportunists and rabble risers)... or since it's a  group you approve of are they okay?

I'd love to join this movement myself, but I am honestly afraid I would lose my job were I to get involved. I really believe that.

[Baruch]

I'd love to join this movement myself, but I am honestly afraid I would lose my job were I to get involved. I really believe that.

You are being realistic unfortunately.  Will politicizing science continue?  Will R or D push if forward ... since winning at all cost is all they can think about.  As a general conformist, my job is in no danger, other than ageism.

[Munch]

Interesting to read this thread as a fly on the wall. It's great to hear men chiming in with disapproval. I see the focus is all on how the women behaved and the pink hats and lack of class (lol!), and not on the absolutely monstrous, racist, sexist, undiplomatic, reactionary, mentally ill xenophobic vulgarian in the white house.

Is it possible to stop and think for a moment about why all those women might be upset?

By the way Munch, you cannot possibly attribute violence to the women's marches last Saturday. Millions of women marched peacefully. Do you have any reason to mention violence while discussing how you disapprove of this movement?

https://youtu.be/IvnH9YiViAc

https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=CW-jyLex6Mo

Yeah, all I see here is peace and love.

[Mermaid]

Your video shows an anarchist group committing vandalism. They are no more a part of the march than they were of the inauguration.
The rest is people saying things you don't like. Is that really violence?

Millions of angry people marched all over the country. Millions. Literally millions. How many people were injured or had property damaged due to this "violence"?

Of course they are going to say hostile things. That's kind of the point. Is that violence?

Have you even bothered to think about what the marches are about without inserting your judgments into it? It sure doesn't seem like it.

[Munch]

Not all Muslims?