American Elephants

What Were the Women’s Marches All About? by The Elephant's Child

The Women’s March, or Marches, were certainly the subject of Sunday’s news. Everybody was curious to know just what that was all about? It was clearly a  Far-Leftist screed, far more carefully planned than was understood. But what were they opposing?

The women who were marching were responding to a tape of a “locker-room” conversation that was recorded unbeknownst to Mr. Trump, in which he engaged in a remark about the tendency of women to be attracted to someone rich and famous: “They’ll do anything you want, even letting you grab them by their pussy parts.” That conversation, in 2005, was the entirety that the marchers were responding to. The signage was all about that.

There were some professionally printed signs from various sponsors like the Amplifier Foundation and the 56 “non-partisan” organizations that were listed as “partners” for the march that were funded by George Soros. (Mr, Soros does not fund things directly, he usually hides behind other groups)

Reading more carefully, it becomes clear that the women have no idea what Donald Trump advocates, or what he stands for.They didn’t listen to his inaugural speech and don’t know what he said. They know only that he defeated Hillary and it wasn’t fair because she won the popular vote. They clearly don’t know anything about the Electoral College except that it isn’t fair. What they seem to be interested in is having taxpayers fund their contraceptives and abortions, and preferably their sanitary needs as well. Good grief!

Madonna exclaimed about how angry she was (not about what it was about) and how she had thought about blowing up the White House, although as soon as she heard she would be investigated by the Secret Service, she started backtracking like mad.  As far as I can tell, though I haven’t seen transcripts of all the speeches, there is no one that has any understanding of actual issues at all. Do they have any understanding of why Hillary lost?


What on earth does that mean? See how clever, she ran ‘each other’ all together. ‘Womanhood indeed.’


Another. Could any of these messages be any more empty? The women I know are a lot smarter than this. No content, no substance.

Empty posters, purposeless march. But they had a good time. Guys wearing Trump hats had to clean up the mess they left behind.

3 Comments so far
Leave a comment

What I find most bizarre, is that women constantly portray themselves as “victims” to men. That surely means, they have learnt that men can be manipulated by pretending they’re a victim. Which surely says a lot about the good nature of men and the horrific nature of women who intentionally manipulate men through this victimhood lie.

So, the reality to me seems to be that men’s good nature is being abused by women – making us the victims and women the abusers.


Comment by Scottish Sceptic

My sister and her husband, who live in DC, caught part of that act on Saturday, when they were going to lunch. She said it was the most incoherent group she’d ever heard, even more so than the Occupy people a few years ago. She couldn’t find two people who gave the same answer as to what was being protested, other than “Trump!”.

My sister heard some of the Ashley Judd speech, and her only thought was how crazy she sounded. Everything my sister heard were complaints about things that aren’t really problems; harassment, equal pay, birth control, “our bodies, our rights”. Like the Occupy Movement, it’ll probably take a month or so to find some meaning in all of it.

In the meantime, it took all day Sunday and into Monday morning to clean up the mess, and the buzz around DC isn’t about the message they were promoting (whatever it was), but how annoying the whole thing was.


Comment by Lon Mead

Women as victims? These posters say more than they know. ‘Selves fully embracing each other’ is a frank and uninhibited demand for a return to the unity and peace of the womb. Separation, above all, is dreaded. For individualism, and with it responsibility and freedom, begins at the moment of partition from the mother. These women represent the point of view of the foetus. Ironically, this is the p-o-v they say does not exist.

In apparent contrast, the second poster speaks of a powerful self, free of all the inhibitors imposed by ‘bourgeois’ society.

A moment’s reflection will show that, at base, these sentiments are on a continuum. The achievement of absolute power – the neo-nate’s dream – can only be possible in the ‘destiny community’ where there is indeed no separation.

These ideas have emerged on their current scale in a society which has – fatally? – lost the will to freedom.


Comment by Kolnai

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: