Was the Women’s March really about women’s rights?
One poster featured a Muslim woman with her head draped in an American flag. Did any of the marchers proudly brandishing that poster stop to think what would likely happen to a woman in many Muslim countries who did such a thing? Or even in the US?
But I digress. American women actually have it pretty good, as far as rights go. More than pretty good. Much better than many women on the planet.
But rather than focusing on them, American women demanded, “What about us?”
What about you? Well, for one thing, there sure was a lot of offensive profanity about at an event where many brought their children. Not to mention all the vagina images, imagine explaining that one to your preschooler!
I suppose the point was to NOT be ladylike, because after all that is somehow now taboo, it seems. (Meanwhile the ladylike women of the day shined like beacons of light, in comparison, looking even more so by contrast, but I digress.)
The thing I find most interesting is how if the messages and signs and images were reversed, if let’s say HRC had won and men around the country marched in mass with signs saying, “Kill the Matriarchy!” and “She’s not MY president!” how would that have been received? Much less them dressing up and parading about as penises or sporting penis hats?
When one reverses the message, it suddenly sounds a lot like hate speech, doesn’t it? Interesting…
It’s a good litmus test. If a group’s message isn’t also acceptable in reverse, maybe it is not acceptable at all?
Let those who have ears hear.