~ archived since 2018 ~

Women's March

January 23, 2017

I have been itching to hear other opinions on this major event. I hope this is OK to post, I do realize there will be conflicting political views but the point of the discussion is regarding only "women's rights" under the Trump administration and no other political agenda. I hope we can remain civil and only exchange ideas and opinions!

I also realize the media can be biased in reporting details (eg. Were the women marching "young and beautiful" or were they "fat feminists"?) so I welcome differing reports on what you read or witnessed.

Since we are a community of women with generally conservative and anti-feminist views, I would like to raise the following question:

What are your views on the occurrence and the message of the women's march?

Happy discussing!

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/RedPillWomen.

/r/RedPillWomen archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

Post Information
Title Women's March
Author vanBeethovenLudwig
Upvotes 22
Comments 114
Date January 23, 2017 10:24 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit /r/RedPillWomen
Archive Link
Original Link
Red Pill terms in post

[–]MentORPHEUSTRP Endorsed54 points55 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

What are your views on the occurrence

Sign of a healthy Democracy and engaged electorate. Marching peacefully for a cause important to you is great, especially in this age of apathy and emoting-without-voting. Contrast this to the idiots rioting and those who burned a limousine.

and the message of the women's march?

Trump made many anti Roe v Wade statements during his campaign, then chose Mike Pence as his running mate. The women marching in Washington took note. Did you?

I predict there will be much buyer's remorse among current Trump fans.

[–]mabeol12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Very well said. Thank you.

[–]Rommel05026 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I would only agree with your last sentence if he turned out to be much different than what he promised during the campaign. While its early, he has thus far been more consistent than any politician Ive ever seen. That he's already a billionaire and consequently almost impervious to bribes, Id be a bit surprised if that changed.

Like him or hate him, it sure seems like what you see is what you get.

[–]brackbunduru points points [recovered] | Copy Link

  • Feminism disgusts me.

  • Trump is not going to take away women's rights and never suggested he would, so they look very stupid for marching in response to his inauguration.

  • Calling Trump a sexist for saying the word "pussy" is ridiculous (context!!) and I immediately lose respect for anyone who brings it up in a serious way.

[–]UCanHaveTheCrown19 points20 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

All of this

Also I think far too many people are just desperate to be part of something and attended so that they could take selfies and put it on social media and feel like they were part of history despite not totally know what they are marching for.

I have never in my life felt I couldn't do something (other than obviously something biologically impossible or something I'm just incapable of doing) because I was a woman. I've never felt oppressed. But I am also the type of person who is fully aware that men and women are not equal and we're not supposed to be.

I just saw a million women I totally can not relate to

[–]procastanationgal2016 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Except he wanted to grab a women by the pussy. He also has just stopped funding to provide women safe access for abortion. He has time and time again demeaned and been rude to women.

[–]SouthernAthenaEndorsed Contributor5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link


[–]Jayms13 points14 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm not really sure what they were marching for either. I don't think Trump hates women or is going to take away any rights. As far as funding for abortions and contraception, I don't think taxpayers should be forced to pay for these things. If you choose to have one, that is your decision and you should pay for it, same with plastic surgery, for example.

I heard about several women attacking other women too, one lit a Trump-supporting woman's hair on fire. That is so hypocritical to say women should unite and then to attack another woman who doesn't agree. And the speeches by the celebrities who talked about using violence against the President because they don't agree with him is, IMO, immature.

As a woman, I don't identify with those who were marching. I also wouldn't want to be seen in public with a vagina on my head and don't think that is very dignified, but that's just me. Overall, I am inclined to believe these women have been manipulated into marching and are being used for more sinister purposes that have not yet come to light.

[–]otherlingoddone9 points10 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Actually , the government is banned from funding abortions , republicans fought for that and won in the 70s. Birth control , though , I believe should be covered by insurance , to cut down on pregnancy , but also because many women need it for medical reasons, as it normalizes otherwise inconvenient or unsafe periods. My friend Rachel used to actually be unable to keep down food sometimes due to cramping , and the BC really helped.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree birth control should be funded. For those that want to have abortion clinics defunded, then we have to find birth control. You can't have it both ways and you certainly can't force your religious views on other people.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

I did not go because I felt it would just be a huge circle jerk.

There were a lot of conflicting signs "women deserve as many rights as guns" when guns don't have more rights than women.

There was a lot of "you're still not equal" arguments because we have to "convince a judge we were raped" and I'm like uh duh. Of course you do. And that we get paid less when that is false except for few exceptions (I.e. Sports). Then a lot of women pulling feminists from the past and trying to claim they are being just as amazing as them when the feminists of the past actually did things.

If I posted any of this I would be told to "check my privilege" because if I don't agree with something it immediately means I'm blinded by privilege.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Are you referring to this article?

I was utterly disgusted upon reading it.

[–]NoFaceNoPlace points points [recovered] | Copy Link

Yuppp. I can't even share how I think about it because I'll be burned at the stake

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Yep. The March is gospel in my circle too.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Do you have the article that this article is responding to? (The "I'm not a disgrace to women because I didn't march article")

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Unfortunately I don't. I don't believe she linked it in her post.

[–]Cardiscappa26 points27 points  (28 children) | Copy Link

What exactly where they marching for?

[–]Cardiscappa16 points17 points  (19 children) | Copy Link

I saw Tweets with photos of the garbage in the aftermath of the event. Signs littered everywhere. I posted in a FB group, that had lots of people who went, the links to the photo and a screen capture of what percentage of women are in the garbage collection field: 1%.

Edit: One of the organizers, Linda Sarsour, is a Muslim and an advocate of Sharia Law in the USA.

[–]PerryCox-MD points points [recovered] | Copy Link

Like her being Muslim makes her a bad person.

[–][deleted] 34 points35 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

Advocating for Sharia Law doesn't exactly make her an upstanding individual

[–]PerryCox-MD points points [recovered] | Copy Link

That's true but I'm frustrated at all the anti-Muslim, anti-Arab rhetoric that's been increasingly showing up on here and RPWi. I've been a member of this community for the last 3-4 odd years and this is a relatively new development. It's pretty worrying to me as a RPW Arab Muslim woman.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

As long as you understand that the Sharia is a book and not how a secular government should be run you can be whatever you want

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I can understand your frustration. I haven't personally seen the anti-Arab rhetoric, but I don't doubt there is some. However, I don't think the above poster was referring to Muslims as bad people, rather that Sharia is bad, and typically non-Muslims don't advocate for Sharia (although western white feminists have been doing so lately.)

[–]PerryCox-MD points points [recovered] | Copy Link

Believe me, I'm just as disgusted by feminists who push for Sharia law and bleeding-heart liberals who welcome massive numbers of Middle Eastern refugees and opportunists into their countries with no regard for the threat they pose to the future/security of their homelands and their people... and I understand such rhetoric to be reactionary to what's going on, but it doesn't mean it should be encouraged or disregarded. Marginalization is one of the building blocks of religious extremism after all.

[–]Cardiscappa7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Critiquing Islam, an ideology, is no different than critiquing Feminism, an ideology.

The problem is a large population of Muslims coming into Western countries and not integrating: when in Rome, do as the Romans. Sarsour wants to be able to practice Sharia Law in the USA, which is completely and utterly incompatible with what Western society holds dear. There are many and very serious cases that are not talked about because it's taboo to say anything negative or critical about Islam. It's very dangerous and juxtapositions like the Woman's March being organized by a proponent of Sharia Law needs to be discussed publicly. Did any of the women in Paris march for this? Or the LGBTQIA protesting about Isis throwing gays off buildings?

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Hmm, I haven't seen the antiMuslim rhetoric on RPW, but I actually live under Sharia law right now. I find it strange if RPW is completely against Sharia law because I've noticed it coincides with a lot of RPW philosophy, and I've noticed in my country women actually get a lot of benefits. I don't think Sharia law is as anti-woman as Westerners think, especially if they've never lived directly under it.

[–]Cardiscappa2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Are you able to explain to me the similarities between Sharia Law and RPW? What benefits does a woman receive in a country run by Sharia that a woman living in North America does not?

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 5 points6 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Yes dear, I'd be happy to! Sharia law is taking the ideas in the Quran and instead of letting it be a moral book for people to choose to follow, it's the basis of the government. All Arab countries are widely differing on their laws. Mine is officially under Sharia law.

1) They emphasize protecting women. One major reason for abayas and hijabs (although in my country you are not required to wear one as a Westerner) is for the women to keep her body sacred for her husband. And believe me, I know plenty of Arab women that dress like a whore under that abaya - they just only show it to their husbands at home. Also, contrary to popular belief, women make a choice to cover themselves for the reason stated above - many women are proud to only shows themselves to their husbands. Saudi Arabia is a whole other story though, that's a bit extreme Sharia government where you are forced to cover, but where I live it's a choice, but you still have to dress conservatively. I think a common misconception is Muslim women are oppressed by the Quran to cover, but the ones I know are very proud to stay protected for themselves.

2) Adding to #1, women are not allowed in bikinis or Western swimwear in public beaches. You have to go to a private beach or a fancy hotel pool/beach. This is part of the protection and also modesty of women's bodies, because Sharia law knows that women are seen as sexual objects, so they don't desire it to be shown in public.

3) Not exactly Sharia law but Muslim women dress very feminine. They do their makeup nicely and the ones who don't choose to cover themselves, wear conservative but very sensual clothing. Beautiful colors, prints, jewelry, high heels, matching color schemes. This was the first time I ever saw women dressing so beautifully and elegant but also showing no skin (except their faces). Not just Arab women but Indonesian women (whom a majority are Muslim) also dress like this.

4) They're anti-infidelity. A woman's loyalty should be to her husband. As a woman, it's illegal to live with a man if you're not married (although many Western couples do so in secret) and if you have a baby out if wedlock, you are deported. Sharia law does not like single mothers. This forces women to make good choices so they're not having sex with random men and not living with a man before marriage leaves you "pure." Basically imagine having no access to contraception - I bet less women would be riding the cc, don't you think? However, drugstores do sell condoms here, as for birth control pills I'm not really sure.

5) Discrimination. Sharia law is discriminatory against women and men. Single men are not allowed to enter many premises unless they are with a woman, otherwise known as "family." The government punishes men who don't choose to have a family as well. Also, there are many women only events where they don't allow male employees. I've gotten so many gigs here as a woman because my male colleagues aren't allowed to go. In some government run areas, women are allowed to go in a separate line and basically cut the line because you're a woman. Men have to actually wait in a line, unless they're a "family man."

6) A woman cannot be the boss of her husband at work. It's illegal to let the wife work in a higher position than her husband in the same company (if different companies then it doesn't matter). Sharia law prefers the man to lead in the family. However, at work a woman can be the boss of men. She just can't be the boss of her husband.

That being said, I'm not advocating for Sharia law. I'm simply just stating the actual experience of living under it than someone who never has an had this horrible conception that women are stoned all the time and beat and rapes, because it's not true.

As for benefits, there's really only one major benefit here and it's that people acknowledge you're a woman and make excuses for it. So in the US, no one cares if you're a woman because equal rights and anti-discriminatory policies, if you're acting like a woman at work then you'd better man up or get out. But here, you can get away with a LOT as a woman. Don't want to lift heavy things? There's always a man willing to help you. Wearing high heels and your feet are tired? Men are understanding instead of telling you you're being impractical, because they know as a woman you should look beautiful. Can't handle a high powered position? Don't worry, just take a less stressful job and live an easy life, men won't judge you because women shouldn't be so hardened in their work anyway. However, if you're a feminist and want to be treated like a man, then USA or other Western country is better for you. I prefer living in an Arab country where they treat me like a woman.

Also, as a single woman with a job here, your job package far outweighs a single male, because "single men can live under precarious conditions but single women need to be put in safe spaces because she doesn't have a man to protect her." You can also be very successful as a business woman if you just work the woman angle - dress nicely, be feminine and businessmen will worship you and enjoy your company. You can get what you want just by being a feminine woman. If you don't work as a woman (as a wife), you are not forced to stay home - you are encouraged to go to the spa and the shopping mall, and enjoy life's luxuries, while your husband works. People don't think it's strange if you don't work as a woman.

I hope this helps!

[–]CleburnCO2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

While that is one answer, the fundamental problem is this-

The highest goal of a follower of Islam is to emulate Mohamed. He is the perfect muslim, yes?

So, lets look at what all he did to see what we should do in our lives-

Slaves...yes, lots of them. Killed men, captured their wives, made them sex slaves for himself and his men, killed their kids, and so on.

Murdered men, women, children....yep. For reasons like being another religion, having a pretty wife that he wanted...things like that.

Rape? Absolutely, lots of it and directed his men to do the same. Women are property and can be disposed of as per his book.

Pedophile? with little girls was great with him.

So...the gist of that is that no, Islam is not great for women or anyone else that values human rights. You can't seek to emulate Mohamed while saying you value women's rights.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You're taking this to a whole other level and arguing for something I never said. While I don't advocate for Sharia law, all I simply said was there were some parts of Islam that coincide with RPW regarding the relationship between a man and a woman. I never said I agreed with anything about rape or murder or pedophilia. Also, as with any religion, there are people who follow it to different degree. I have a problem with people who say all Muslims are here same because every Muslim agrees with the extreme philosophies of Islam. That's like saying every Christian is an Evangelical.

[–]Cardiscappa1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I appreciate your thoughtful answer. It seems a very romanticized segregation, but would still be incompatible with Western countries. I would guess you would be middle to upper class? My aunt lived in Qatar with her husband (white, Western, upper class) for many years and she had similar perspective on Muslim woman as you do.

Does your country perform female circumcision? What are your thoughts on that? On honour killings? Are you able to vote and what are your thoughts on being or not being able to? (And is your country conscription?)

Feel free to private message me if you wish. I'd love to pick your brain more.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't agree with female circumcision or honor killings and I'm aware of the violent aspect of Islam. I just mentioned some parts of Islam that coincide with RPW philosophy. I don't want to open up an unnecessary can of worms.

[–]REDPILLHULK1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

She made a joke about sharia law on twitter. Probably in poor taste, but people are running with that and pretending that one joke makes her an extremist who wants to institute sharia law. It's just another knee jerk reaction that all muslims are savages and terrorists. They're not.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You might be right. I highly doubt she's an extremist with ties to Isis organizing campaigns in broad daylight, as articles have claimed.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think you were mistaken, that they were criticizing sharia law, not muslims

[–]CleburnCO1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

She is directly connected to militant Islamic organizations that actively subjugate women, gays, and minorities. She is $$$ for her work. It's not altruistic.

[–]Jayms2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That is definitely a concern and I'm not sure why more people aren't talking about it. I get the feeling something more sinister is afoot and people are being distracted by fighting over "women's issues."

[–]AthenaOverAres7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women's March Policy Platform.

It contains 96 words, which is, ironically, approximately the same number of pictures on the page.

There are also ~500 citations concerning on attendance.. 500 citations. <100 words. Seems like a lot more effort went into things that are tangential to their goal.

You can also follow their links to the Mission Statement and Unity Principles. Full disclosure: I stopped reading the Principles at

The rate of imprisonment has grown faster for women than men, increasing by 700% since 1980

for my own sanity. Contrary to the Wikipedia, this contains no citations.

[–]Rpwrpwrpw11 points12 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Haha, I was trying to figure it out too and I couldn't. Women have nothing to complain about anymore so maybe they're just demonstrating for no specific reason? I wouldn't be surprised.

[–]fuzzzybunny18 points19 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The maintenance of programs like planned parenthood and the continuation of rights which women have earned. Women and men feel progress is being threatened. A March is a physical show of force via numbers to solidify that this opinion is not an intangible thing.

[–]CleburnCO0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

You use words like "right"...perhaps without understanding the definition of a right.

It is tempting to call things that you like, "Rights"...but you might want to follow a narrow definition of that word as it will get used to do the opposite of what you like when the pendulum swings the other way.

Empowering government to create "rights" that you like, also empowers them to create "rights" that you don't like or to take "rights" away from you.

[–]fuzzzybunny2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I was specifically referring to the regulated ability, privilege, Supreme Court ruling on abortion. Please excuse my late night word choice.

[–]Jagrmystr0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think it was more of a parade than a march...

[–]Willow-girl0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

To express butthurt, lol.

[–]electrokiwi19 points20 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

I marched, and so did my captain. I'll tell you why: Trump will repeal ACA which will take away anti gender discriminatory insurance policies, and I believe healthcare in wealthy nations should be a right. Trump was accused of sexual assault by multiple women and I believe them. Trump has already worked to defund clinics offering abortions, and I believe in right to choose, as well as the availability of the other health resources these clinics offer women. Ethically, I think women's health should be considered important. Economically, preventative treatments and family planning save the tax payer. And my amazing captain supports me in my political views, although he is a little less left. We have healthy discussions on feminism, and the parts we both think are good and the parts we find detrimental. He found the march interesting. We enjoyed the signs. He doesn't seem threatened at all by my beliefs because he understands that my dedication to him as his woman is separate from my politics. edit: a letter

[–]Willow-girl4 points5 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

I'm not sure what the rules are as far as getting into political debates here, so I'll restrain myself to commenting on only one issue you raise, "anti-gender discriminatory insurance policies." The idea that insurance companies discriminated against women prior to the ACA is a bit flawed. Yes, women were charged more, because they tended on average to use more services, thus to be more expensive clients, most likely due to the cost of obstetrical care. Older people were charged more than younger people for the same reason (well, not because of obstetrical services, lol). Were insurance companies "discriminating" against older people, too? Or were they simply pricing their product based on expected utilization of services? I don't have a problem with that, frankly.

Now, if men and women (or old and young) used equivalent amounts of services, but one group was arbitrarily charged more than the other, THAT would be discrimination, IMO.

Also, a small beef about the ACA: I have permanent birth control, and prior to its inception, I could choose to buy a private policy excluding BC and obstetrical coverage, which was much cheaper as a result. The ACA has removed that option, so now I have to pay more for coverage I don't need. (Ditto for the many health screenings whose costs are all built into every policy now.) Am I happy about this? Umm, no.

[–]electrokiwi8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Once again, I believe healthcare shouldn't be a product sold for profit, and women do require more care. I think that women should be given that care. I also think about the big picture, and don't mind paying higher premiums in order to make sure that everyone is covered to the extent that should be medically necessary. The problem with premiums is that you still have private corporations setting these prices, arbitrarily pulling out of marketplaces for lack of profits when healthcare shouldn't be a product. The difference here goes down to fundamental values. I value a community approach to wellness, and people like yourself are more interested in individual wellness. So we will have to agree that disagree.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

One of the problems with ACA as a plan is that people were being charged outrageous fees for not having issurance. Also universal healthcare is great in theory, as another person mentioned, but the problem becomes that most universal health care systems are mediocre at best, and people that can afford better treatment will seek it elsewhere.

[–]electrokiwi3 points4 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Once again, I believe healthcare shouldn't be a product sold for profit, and women do require more care. I think that women should be given that care. I also think about the big picture, and don't mind paying higher premiums in order to make sure that everyone is covered to the extent that should be medically necessary. The problem with premiums is that you still have private corporations setting these prices, arbitrarily pulling out of marketplaces for lack of profits when healthcare shouldn't be a product. The difference here goes down to fundamental values. I value a community approach to wellness, and people like yourself are more interested in individual wellness. So we will have to agree that disagree.

[–]Willow-girl2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Agreed! Just remember, nothing is "free." It's only a question of who pays, and how much.

I'll expand just a little bit. Theoretically, a single-payer system in which the government collects a tax and uses it to pay for everyone's healthcare sounds great. There are certainly some efficiencies (at least potentially). The problem is when you try to apply theory to "real life" ... for instance, a situation in which legislators are beholden to powerful industry interests. This sets up a situation in which the taxpaying public is likely to be fleeced by service providers charging outrageous prices. Do you trust our government to negotiate in good faith on our behalf? I don't. That's the reality of the situation.

[–]electrokiwi0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I would trust the government to negotiate on our behalf if there was a serious overhaul of establishment politicians, but as it stands now, no. I would have trusted leaders such as Bernie Sanders, to navigate this, with a democratic congress, moreso, however.

[–]Willow-girl1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Better keep an eye on that "Democratic Congress" ... 13 Democratic senators refused to back Bernie Sanders' plan to let Americans import drugs from Canada. It's not only Republicans who are in the pockets of business and industry ...

[–]vajeni20 points21 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

Annoyed. I am not a victim, don't make me out to be one.

[–]fuzzzybunny-1 points0 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Annoyed at how many people take something global and make it specifically about them.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It unfortunately, is made about individuals when groups of women shame the other women who chose not to participate :/

[–]fuzzzybunny1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That is upsetting. I hope that doesn't happen or continue to happen to you.

[–]vajeni4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

It was a protest against the president. Don't try to make it out to be anything other than that.

[–]fuzzzybunny-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Okay. I take it you don't want to hear things outside of your own opinion. The original intent of the post was to gather multiple opinions. That is why I share my perspective and experience.

[–]vajeni6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

By replying to my comment you're posting your opinion? You're obviously trying to argue. I was simply giving my opinion as well. Works both ways dear.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

What about this particular march was global? I'm genuinely curious.

[–]fuzzzybunny0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Global in the physical sense that multiple nations spanning multiple continents held marches. As well as global as in whole, large, broad.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Weren't they piggy-backing off of U.S. issues? Cheerleading, in a sense? I'm just curious if there were countries like Iran marching for their own local issues.

[–]fuzzzybunny1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes you are correct As we impose regulations across more than our nation and set trends beyond what our regulation reaches. Don't have a list of what countries participated. But I see what you're getting at. Again though, the problems in Iran and the problems and the US can both exist and can be marched about together or separately. Because we are better off here than other places doesn't take away the points presented by this particular movement.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The problem is that quite a few women in the U.S. rightly feel that problems being presented in the march don't exist in this country. It doesn't make the march invalid, by any sense, but there are legitimate criticisms to be made for it, and that's what /u/vajeni was referring to.

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

From what I could gather the march was primarily about reproductive rights/birth control? I get that those things are important to most women (including myself), but:

1) the pill doesn't need to be free, use a condom 2) Trump doesn't care about abortion; he many times said leave it to the states. Abortions also aren't a right, nor is easy access to them. If a woman wants an abortion, I have no qualms with that, but what I do have a problem with is demanding that there should be more clinics that offer abortions AND that those abortions should be affordable (aka free).

Besides that, the march organizers were fighting amongst themselves about intersectionality, which I find completely hilarious. Also wage gap, muh vagina, but don't objectify muh vagina, patriarchy, #slutshaming, and all that other jazz is apparently very important stuff. The only thing I didn't see was rape culture signs, which surprises me.

[–]REDPILLHULK5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I think many women are alarmed that he freely admitted to grabbing and kissing women without their permission, and implied he has the authority to do whatever he wants to any woman he meets because he's famous. The reproductive fight isn't a new thing. Having a president who advocates sexual assault sure is.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

He's basically Chad. That shouldn't surprise anyone here. I don't think making an off-handed comment in a private conversation with "the boys" is akin to advocating for something.

[–]REDPILLHULK5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

When someone shows you who they are, believe them. His attitude clearly shows he thinks that kind of behavior is ok. Maybe advocate wasn't the perfect word, but I think you understand my point.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm afraid I just don't agree with you. I get why you might think that way, but agree to disagree.

[–]Goodfortune206 points7 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

The only problem is Condoms cost money too and sometimes people won't buy them, or men will refuse to wear them if a woman buys them. So I do think, for underprivileged people at least, that the pill should be more widely available.. think of the big picture: The pill being easier to access would cut down on unwanted pregnancies and would decrease young single mothers that sponge off welfare.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

I think it'd be better to have subsidized condoms, if anything. At least condoms have the added bonus of preventing STD's. If men are refusing to wear them and women are going along with it, they probably weren't going to use the pill anyway. You can't cure stupid with BC. In the big picture sense, yes, there should be some easy to access form of BC, but it doesn't need to be/shouldn't be the pill. I'd gladly pay into a system that helps adults get access to free condoms.

[–]Goodfortune202 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

When it comes down to it though, some men flat out refuse to wear condoms. Ive heard of men having condoms but not wearing them because they don't feel good. So women really do need the pill.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Like I said, if they're going to date low-value men like that, reproductive safety nets aren't probably much of concern...Besides that, those women would probably be catching STD's left and right from men that refuse to wrap it up.

[–]Goodfortune202 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I see what you're saying.. but still really it's very widespread.. There are a lot of low value men who won't wear condoms.. I still think making the pill free and easy to access to a certain impoverished people would help cut down on unwanted pregnancies and help cut down on that culture of young single mothers who sponge of welfare for 18 years or more. It's a big drain when so many women are having children that the government is financially supporting. ultimately this behavior benefits the lower class, but it makes the middle class poorer, because the money is coming out of their paychecks, so ultimately the average man and woman becomes weak and depressed from carrying such a heavy financial burden. That's really the main issue, is that they're ultimately taking money away from hard working people that should be living better lives than they are.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I just don't see BC pill being the solution, personally. It would be harmful to have a bunch of women walking around that can't afford medical care regularly on BC due to the averse effects associated with the pill (blood clots, depression, hormonal imbalances.)

[–]bowie7476 points7 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Do they seriously claim that the contraceptive pill should be free? That's insane. If used for medical purposes (menstrual/hormone issues etc) then it's reasonable that it should be subsidised like other medications. But as a contraceptive it should incurr tax just like other contraceptives eg condoms.

The luxury tax on fem hygeine products is silly too.

Everything else about this march is a joke. I've heard rumours that it was planned over a year ago to celebrate Hillary's win, and they figured they'd just go through with it and change the agenda slightly.

The fact that so many people are asking what the march was actually for, and claiming that it's stupid are evidence enough that it was unnecessary.

Edit: I've done some reading and learned that the UN declares access to contraception a basic human right. I don't necessarily agree with that but it makes sense - people are going to fuck each other so let's try and prevent overpopulation etc. Fine. Being a basic human right does not necessitate that the gvt pays for it. Internet has been declared a basic human right and we pay for that. Shit we pay for food and water too. Apparently the contraceptive pill costs $20-50/month in the US. That's not a lot. If a couple is having sex twice per day and they're using condoms and not the pill, then he's paying around $50/month for those. Are these feminists asking for condoms to be free as well?

I think sometimes there is no answer to political questions, people just want to complain about shit and be heard.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's just kind of convoluted when they say it's a womens' march, but it's also an anti-Trump march? Even though Trump isn't some great enemy to women like they claim. Seems like most people are just going with it because it's exciting.

[–]otherlingoddone6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Abortions aren't allowed to be funded by the government. They aren't , and they never will be. Republicans fought for that in the 70s , won , and are still bitching and moaning about how "their tax dollars" (they don't understand economics ) are going to killing babies 😒🙄🤔

You agree that if it's for medical reasons , the pill should be covered by insurance. That's literally what everyone is fighting for. Nobody is fighting for free , or single payer healthcare. What we are fighting for though , is for those things to be covered by our insurance so that we can afford them.

Also , please remember that the pill and condoms aren't the only type of birth control. For many women , the pill can make mental health symptoms ALOT worse (funnily enough , they've made a pill for men , but did not release it to the public because it was deemed too dangerous for men, even though it has the same side effects as the women's pill) and it's not worth it. So they get an IUD , or the shot , or they just get their tubes tied. Nobody wants these services to be free. They just want them covered by insurance.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Actually, the male contraceptive test was halted because not only were male participants becoming depressed (one even offed himself, even though it was deemed unrelated), some of the men were not recovering fertility. I would consider that pretty dangerous.

[–]bowie7470 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

If it's for medical reasons yes I agree. As a contraceptive, I don't agree. I don't know how they'd police that though...

Is that all? Seems like a lot of trouble for $35/month.

[–]otherlingoddone points points [recovered] | Copy Link

Yeah well if you're living paycheck to paycheck , 35 bucks a month makes a huge difference. But let's say they need it for medical reasons , but cannot use the pill. An IUD can cost upwards of 1500 dollars , and the shot upwards of 200.

[–]bowie7471 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's got to be a significant minority. If IUD and/or shot is required for medical reasons it should be subsidised too.

Still, that's a lot of people chanting in the streets over very little. I'm no men's rights activist (I think they should suck it up and get on with life) but they have more cause for protest, and they get laughed out of every room they enter.

[–]Rommel05024 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You dig deep enough with these feminists and you'll find they think everything should be free ... at least to them anyway.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It would have been great if as per the dictionary definition of feminism they advocated for true equality and addressed issues of parental alienation and shared parenting

[–]bowie7470 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

After watching this election cycle I have learned that often there is no right or wrong, some people just want to complain and be listened to.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

It seemed a bit pointless to me. A lot of it was protesting Trump (who I do think has expressed some pretty disgusting views of women), but that's a complete waste of time after an inauguration. I thought it was pretty strange that I know far more women who joined their local march than who canvassed before the election.

I do think free contraception is probably good economic policy, as it's much cheaper for the government than a child, particularly one born to the sort of mother to whom free contraception makes a significant difference.

[–]Goodfortune205 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Second paragraph- my thoughts exactly.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

No more disgusting than Clinton and her support of her husband while he was President. Personally, she and her supporters have a lot nerve. Trump says these things and OMG! he's so evil yet they are willing to give a pass to a someone like Bill Clinton.

I didn't care for either one of them but the hypocrisy on the left is disgusting.

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor3 points4 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I still don't understand what it was about, even after trying to understand. I tend to prefer to understand people's points of views, even if I don't agree with him. The best I can do is say it was really about people being mad about Trump being elected, and being afraid of what he might do.

Here is their mission statement from their website:

The rhetoric of the past election cycle has insulted, demonized, and threatened many of us - immigrants of all statuses, Muslims and those of diverse religious faiths, people who identify as LGBTQIA, Native people, Black and Brown people, people with disabilities, survivors of sexual assault - and our communities are hurting and scared. We are confronted with the question of how to move forward in the face of national and international concern and fear.

In the spirit of democracy and honoring the champions of human rights, dignity, and justice who have come before us, we join in diversity to show our presence in numbers too great to ignore. The Women’s March on Washington will send a bold message to our new government on their first day in office, and to the world that women's rights are human rights. We stand together, recognizing that defending the most marginalized among us is defending all of us.

We support the advocacy and resistance movements that reflect our multiple and intersecting identities. We call on all defenders of human rights to join us. This march is the first step towards unifying our communities, grounded in new relationships, to create change from the grassroots level up. We will not rest until women have parity and equity at all levels of leadership in society. We work peacefully while recognizing there is no true peace without justice and equity for all.

The bolded part is my highlight. To the best of my understanding that was what the rally was about. To remind Trump, that there are many women (Or "marginalized" people? Can't really tell, it says it's for everyone in the mission statement, but it's called a women's march, with pink beanies.) who will be mad if he makes more conservative policy changes.

[–]REDPILLHULK1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Applying a penalty to someone for a basic service like healthcare based on a biological factor they cannot control--like age or gender or disability--is the definition of discrimination. "Only the healthiest people in society deserve affordable hearth care" is a very troubling value for a society to hold.

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't really want to get into a political debate with you. That is one of the nice things about Red Pill Women, it is not really a political discussion space. But, in this instance I am not even sure what you mean by "penalty", I can only assume you mean:

Removing free access to birth control and abortions.

Since that is definitely not a service provided to men, having it would be a "benefit" to women due to their gender, rather than a "penalty" to take it away. Now, if you want to have the discussion that "women need this benefit due to the biological burden that being female imposes on them", that is fine. I am perfectly fine with the argument that men and women have different needs. But saying it is a "penalty" to take something away from women that men do not have an equal right to, is simply not correct. To treat the genders equally would mean for neither or both to have it.

[–]otherlingoddone-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Wow. You read , and used context clues perfectly. May have found the smartest guy on this thread.

[–]SouthernAthenaEndorsed Contributor6 points7 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I am supremely indifferent. I don't think it was necessary, I wasn't offended by it, nothing. I didn't even know what they were marching for. I even asked on my Facebook what people were representing since I know many people who participated. I got many answers, and the vision only got more fragmented the more people who responded.

I guess I am slightly frustrated that this happened since I think feminism needs to die a swift death, and a lot of the things they are protesting are based on false statistics (1 in 4 rape stats, the gender wage gap). On the other hand, I don't think they will accomplish much, so no big deal.

[–]fuzzzybunny1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link slightly die a swift death. Maybe you don't know you're own vision.

[–]SouthernAthenaEndorsed Contributor9 points10 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

My passion against feminism is clear. My opinion on the march goes between indifferent to slightly frustrated. Not a big variance.

[–]fuzzzybunny2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Good deal.

[–]CleburnCO9 points10 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

It seems ironic, that they are marching in a country where women actually are equal...when there are so many countries where women are treated like cattle. Yet, one of their primary organizers supports Sharia and similar, which is the exact opposite of empowering for women. Where is the march for the women that had her rape livestreamed on facebook last week in Sweeden? Where is the march through the no go sections of Paris, London, and similar? Women are not safe in those places. Women are abused and have few rights there...yet no march? Why is that?

[–]fuzzzybunny9 points10 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

The march was multinational. And the existence of multiple issues does not take away from this specific issue. I find this form of argument is constantly used and incredibly lacking in validity.

Edit: multiple auto correct issues

[–]CleburnCO1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

What are you trying to say? The entire point is that there was no point...your point is equally unclear. Validity for what? Were women not allowed to vote in the Presidential election? Were they not allowed to speak in public or engage in their enumerated rights, as per the Constitution?

[–]fuzzzybunny8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

In your post you point to the existence of other women's and human rights issues that you have not seen represented in large scale marches or demonstrations. You then use this idea to belittle or take down the importance of the most current march. People revert to this tactic a lot and it is infuriating.

I didn't see your issue encompass this other issue and therefore it's less good doesn't sit well with me.

Organize something you are passionate about that connects with your lifestyle and experiences instead. As opposed to feigning interest only to shoot something down.

[–]fuzzzybunny2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

And considering the multinational, cross continent appeal of the march, it goes beyond the US Presidential election.

[–]CleburnCO7 points8 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Disagreeing with you doesn't invalidate my opinion. Neither does pointing out the illogical nature and timing of this circus. See, this is my issue with third wave can't question them without being labeled as sexist, homophobic, racist, or whatever. It's like they run on some strange emotional cocktail of exuberant victimhood where credibility is based on theoretical oppression points rather than fact.

Cross continent? What does that even mean? Quantify it in specific terms and show a performance/result metric.

There are major women's issues in the world. There are real areas where women could use this attention, money, and support...instead, they stuck hygiene products all over DC and drank Starbucks...because...patriarchy? Really?

Help people that need help...great...but that's not what this looked like to me.

[–]fuzzzybunny2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No labels were thrown. You continue you to be angry at things I am not bringing up and mincing words. That's fine. Moving on though.

[–]otherlingoddone2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

There were women's marches on every continent. There was a women's march in Antarctica. It's multinational.

[–]CleburnCO1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

So...what is the point? Exactly what is the goal? A social event? Great that people got together and got some what end and for what purpose?

[–]otherlingoddone2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

"Even in Sweden, one of the more progressive countries on Saturday’s bill, Lotta can identify her own reasons to take to the streets in solidarity with women in America. “We don’t have the same issues as the U.S.; we don’t have to fight for abortions, and we’re further along with equal pay and female representatives in the government over here,” she explains. “But we support women in other places on the planet, and really, this is about the rise of the right, and I think we’re seeing that everywhere.”"

Perspective from actual Swedish woman , since you wanna make assumptions.

[–]CleburnCO2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Seeing as Sweden has imported an actual real world rape culture and is now the rape capital of the western world, increasing their rate of sexual assault by about 1200% over the last decade...yeah, they have a legitimate reason to march. The women who was raped on livestream facebook a few days ago in Sweden by military aged male refugees would likely agree.

No need to assume anything as math doesn't lie and you can watch the video of her being raped by multiple "refugees" via google.

Yet...those marchers want more refugees and more rape culture to be imported? How exactly is that pro-woman?

Perhaps it has to do with the islamic organizers of this event? Just maybe...

Gullibility is a dangerous trait.

[–]Willow-girl3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Some of the protesters' signs that I saw in the news coverage were pretty appalling. (Like, a drawing of a menstruating vagina? Really?) All I could think was, "Her parents must be so proud ... NOT!"

As for the march in general, I couldn't see much point to it. Rallying around a particular issue perhaps has some value, but a march just to say you're butthurt over the election results?

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

a drawing of a menstruating vagina?

Give it some time and we'll have drawings of pooping butts too. Hey, no shame in pooping, right? It's natural, right? I should display my poop everywhere with no shame, right?

Seriously, some things belong in private. Example - menstruating vaginas. Doesn't mean menstruation is shameful, it just means we have some dignity and respect.

Oh, and not everything needs to be us against them nor is everything a women's issue.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Wow, even CNN says that it's pointless. And it's not at all representative of women. It's mostly white women when the majority of white women voted for Trump, and it excludes pro-life feminists.

I think the women empowerment movement needs to switch from an external approach to an internal approach. They need to stop blaming the "patriarchy" for womens' issues. They should be addressing the problem of women majoring in useless degrees, missing the timeframe for having children, teenagers being beholden to social media bullying, etc. It would be great if they adopted the manosphere model which is mostly about self-improvement.


[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They need to stop blaming the "patriarchy" for womens' issues.

I'm definitely all for the right for women to choose - I think women should choose to be career women or single and childless forever if they want this life, but as you said, just because women can choose doesn't mean they can still blame "the patriarchy." Compared to most of the world, American women have so much freedom and privilege, and I just feel like they're so ungrateful. Take them to live in Saudi Arabia or Nigeria for a month and see if they would rather go back to the US.

[–]Banincoming1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't understand what they were marching for. I saw a lot of pink, was it breast cancer awareness?

[–]Moral_Gutpunch0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have mixed feelings and feel the smaller, more local marches, like the one my Godmother marched in were better. Far less !Offer, more inclusivity for men, more straightforward messages, and not wanting to be associated with sexists, racists, torturers, people who threaten to blow up the White House, or impose Sharia Law.

I'm glad it was mostly peaceful in DC, but some speakers and some aftermath was facepalming.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think they are hypocrites. People attack Donald Trump for his words yet they are willing to stand shoulder with Clinton who slandered anyone who came out and accused her husband of sexual escapades and wrong doings. She was willing to stand by a man who repeatedly cheated on her just for her own political gains. She never worked to get to where she is-she married Bill because she saw potential in using him to ascend to the throne of the presidency.

These same woman who are out there protesting need their heads examined if they think Sharia law is the answer to their problems. For one thing, that spectacle over the weekend would never have happened in a country where they practice it. I mean, how many Muslim countries had Women's Marches of their own? There are NO LGBT rights in those countries so any one who identifies as such would be executed. Women have NO rights-how is that good for them? Boggles the mind.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2023. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter