Error message

  • Notice: Undefined index: taxonomy_term in similarterms_taxonomy_node_get_terms() (line 518 of /home/westvalleyview/public_html/sites/all/modules/similarterms/similarterms.module).
  • Notice: Undefined offset: 0 in similarterms_list() (line 221 of /home/westvalleyview/public_html/sites/all/modules/similarterms/similarterms.module).
  • Notice: Undefined offset: 1 in similarterms_list() (line 222 of /home/westvalleyview/public_html/sites/all/modules/similarterms/similarterms.module).

D.C. march sets all women back

Error message

  • Notice: Undefined index: taxonomy_term in similarterms_taxonomy_node_get_terms() (line 518 of /home/westvalleyview/public_html/sites/all/modules/similarterms/similarterms.module).
  • Notice: Undefined offset: 0 in similarterms_list() (line 221 of /home/westvalleyview/public_html/sites/all/modules/similarterms/similarterms.module).
  • Notice: Undefined offset: 1 in similarterms_list() (line 222 of /home/westvalleyview/public_html/sites/all/modules/similarterms/similarterms.module).
Cary S. Hines's picture

Believe it or not, I’m not defined by my female parts.

I care about a slew of issues, including the economy and international relations. I care about national security, our national debt. I care about the Constitution. I even care about health care, but all health care, not just the stuff that pertains to my female parts. My thyroid was surgically removed a few years back. I have to take a pill every day for the rest of my life because of it. That rates way higher on my health care priority list.

But apparently, a whole lot of women are defined by theirs as evidenced by the thousands who marched Jan. 21 in Washington, D.C. Why else would they have worn silly costumes and banned a group of pro life women from marching?

As a side note, can anyone imagine the brouhaha men would have stirred up had they marched in Washington, D.C., while wearing comparable costumes? I’m guessing most would have found that scenario to be completely unacceptable. “Think about the children!” However, that’s a scenario that would never happen because men are defined by much more than their body parts.

Women should enjoy the same treatment. Our issues extend much further than our body parts. But as long as we dress up in kooky costumes and disavow any woman who isn’t pro choice, we will be marginalized and viewed as a single-issue segment of the population.

Those pro life women had plenty of reasons for marching the day after the inauguration. They disagree with lots of issues President Donald J. Trump campaigned and won on. And they wanted their voices heard. But female body parts and a pro choice stance were the lone requirements for inclusion in the march. And since they failed the second litmus test, they weren’t allowed to stand in solidarity with other women voicing their concerns over the new administration.

I’m disappointed that marches and demonstrations such as these have minimized “women’s issues” to contraception and abortions, period. These women aren’t doing the rest of us any favors. Anyone who thought we weren’t bright enough to comprehend and consider “men’s issues” before has just been proven right.

These women have sent a clear message to the rest of the world: American women care about one thing only: their body parts. They don’t care about jobs, they don’t care about terrorism, they don’t care about any of our rights except the one that was born out of Roe v. Wade.

These women who came so close to getting a female in the Oval Office haven’t done any women, including themselves, any favors with these antics. Nobody wants a single-issue commander in chief.

Yet they’ve gone out of their way to corroborate a negative stereotype that can’t possibly help the next female presidential candidate.

Why would anyone vote for her knowing what they know now?

If that’s all anyone thinks women care about, how will a woman ever take the oath of office?

This march has set all women back.

Rate this article: 
Average: 2 (6 votes)
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
2 + 0 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.

Comments

Gordon Posner's picture

Dear Thomas:

   As usual you make sweeping statements about what "liberal politics" consists of (and therefore what "liberals" believe) without a shred of proof to back it up!  Tell me, sir, back when "conservatives" were cheering the Million Man March, was that "conservative identity politics"?  Were they acting "according to the stereotype or stigma of their own identity" (whatever the heck that's supposed to mean)?

   You remind me of a person in the movie Gentleman's Agreement who asks when Jews will stop making such a big deal out of being Jewish, the answer (of course) is when the world stops making it a disadvantage to be Jewish!

   The women in this march (and the men who marched along side them) see the proposals of the Lying Trump Administration as a direct threat to their rights.  They see a man who took every opportunity to demean women, and boasted of how he grabbed their privates.  Tell me, Thomas, how would you react if an elected President had treated men the same way?

   (Actually, I don't have to ask.  Given your fixation with other men's sexual orientation, as expressed in these pages, I have no doubt what your reaction would be to a President who regarded men as sex objects.)

   America is a nation of immigrants.  We all come from different backgrounds and cultures, and no one expects they be abandoned.  Why is it okay for Italian-Americans to march on Columbus day, protesting stereotypes which treat them all as Mafia members, or for the Irish to march on St. Patrick's Day (and object to stereotypes about the Irish), but it's not okay for these women to do the same!

   Would you make the same remarks about the marches which ended Segregation, including the March On Washington led by Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.?  Were they also a case of acting "according to the stereotype or stigma of their own identity"?

   (And what about the people who march while shouting "White Power"?  What "stereotype or stigma of their own identity" is involved there?)

P.S. - As for Ms. Sansour, all I have to say is that the reports of her supposed support for Sharia appear to have been greatly exaggerated!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/attacks-target-muslim-a...

Dear Editors,

The West Valley View poll question “Do you think the women’s march Jan. 21 in Washington, D.C., helped or hurt women” left out the only real option. Left off the ballot was the correct answer that it made NO DIFFERENCE, because the “women’s march” had no clarity of purpose.

For those that answered it “helped women” then you see women as a parody of clowns. For those that answered it “hurt women” then you have a low opinion of the female gender. It would be just as foolish to think that Chelsea Manning represents all transgender people.

What was on display at the women’s march was good old fashioned liberal identity politics. The mystical belief of liberal identity politics attempts to convince everyone that in order to be accepted one must act according to the stereotype or stigma of their own identity. The “old hippie” battle cry if one wants to be respected, they need to behave in a manner that’s worthy of the specific group.

Ironically one of the co-organizers was Linda Sarsour who is an advocate for Sharia Law in America. I wonder if these people know that under Sharia Law women virtually have no rights. It was rather humorous to see people appearing to be happy carrying around signs of unhappiness.

Thomas

Comment Here