This year, financially secure liberal women are encouraging women to skip work, and not buy anything in order to show America how powerful women are, you can read about it here.

Now, there's no specific mention that participants are well-off, or financially secure, but the movement itself is geared towards women that can afford to take a sick day, or just not go in. Furthermore, it assumes that all women work (sorry stay at home moms, grandmothers, and students that don't work). Women are also encouraged not to buy anything (thus including the non-working demographics).

I dislike the idea that 'sisterhood' ("we're both women so we're in a club!") is idiotic, and I dislike the promotion of skipping work, and the assumption that women just 'can.' It's one thing when workers come together to protest a business for what at least passes as a legitimate reason. Unions exist to protect workers and look out for their interests. While I do think Unions can create just as many problems as they try to solve, and I often disagree with the reasons for strikes - at least there's a cohesive purpose, and specific goals in mind.

Are these 'sisters' going to help out those that get in trouble if they skip out? Or donate money/food to those that take a hit by opting out? What about homeless women?

In addition, this is ultimately a pointless gesture. If all women agreed to stop working and buying things for a week or a month - that would make a meaningful splash. Tomorrow it will be business as usual. They'll go to work, and buy everything they avoided yesterday. When people boycott a specific business - it's not just for a day. Sustained boycotts on companies for a specific reason do get attention. When you hurt the profit margin, people notice.

Furthermore, I think the best time to do a gender boycott would be during the Christmas shopping season. That would be an enormous statement. Get all women to abstain from participating in the holiday season. No cards, no gifts, no meals. If women are as serious about proving how integral, important, and essential they are to the economy (both as workers and as consumers) then leaving the country in a lurch during the most profitable and frenetic time of the year would be impressive and actually add up to something.

But that's the trick - women don't actually care. At least not enough to actually deal with real inconvenience and struggle. The article talks about prior protests. Black Americans didn't stop riding public transportation for a day. I've read accounts of workers that woke up three or more hours early, so they could walk multiple hours to and from work, in any kind of weather - simply to make sure the buses felt their absence. The fervor, sincerity, and true willingness to sacrifice that was so overwhelmingly present then, is wholly absent now.

What we're left with is yet another example of pointless virtue signaling. Liberal, financially secure women get to partake in something that makes them feel better, while accomplishing nothing. Participation is a blip on the screen in terms of commitment and dedication, but they get to pat themselves on the back and pretend they actually did something.

What are your thoughts?

Edit: Great article highlighting the hypocrisy of this protest