by Lil Tuttle
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Radical feminists, scorned by male and female voters in November, unleashed fury and their own brand of hell during this month’s ‘Women’s March’. If they hoped to win fans and converts, they failed miserably. With this kind of optics, they could well stay in political purgatory for a generation or two.
Nasty Celebrities
From Madonna’s f-bomb thoughts about “blowing up the White House,” to Ashley Judd’s “I’m a nasty woman” diatribe, the March on January 21st “turned from a defense of Women’s Rights into a celebration of Women’s Wrongs – a procession of high profile female celebrities just spewing bile,” writes Piers Morgan.
Nasty Costumes, Nasty Signs
It wasn’t only the vile language on display. YahooStyle.com posted a series of “lady parts” costumes, but there’s nothing “lady-like” in the vagina costumes they wore or the home-made signs they carried.
Source: YahooStyle.com
“If you let the Nasty Women Win, You Lose”
Piers Morgan lamented the “blatant hypocrisy at play” and the depths to which participants sank before and during the March:
…when it comes to the high moral bar, why was Madonna allowed to offer ‘free blowjobs to anyone who votes Hillary’ without censure from the sisterhood? Or, if coarse sexual language is so taboo, to tell President Trump to ‘suck a d**k’ on Saturday?
How does threatening to assassinate Donald Trump … play into the narrative of ‘End the hate!’ or ‘Love Trumps hate!’ It doesn’t. … No, this March wasn’t about women’s rights. At its core, it was about Trump-hating and resentment that he won and Hillary lost.
Ladies, I love you. But if you let the nasty women win, you lose.
Pushing the Country Further Right
Morgan point about losing is well taken. A recent study by Professor Omar Wasow at Princeton University’s Department of Politics suggests hostile protests have a negative impact for their causes in the public’s attitudes and voting. Studying the relationship between violent racial protests of the 60s and 70s and subsequent presidential election results, he found that “black-led protests in which some violence occurs are associated with a statistically significant decline in Democratic vote-share in the 1964, 1968 and 1972 presidential elections.”
The Women’s March was non-violent, but the day before over 200 anti-Trump Inauguration Day protestors were arrested for felonious rioting and charged with destroying “property in downtown businesses including a Starbucks, a Bank of America, and a McDonalds as they denounced capitalism and Trump.”
Whether Women’s March participants like it or not, their bitter non-violent protest is likely to be linked closely to Inauguration Day’s violent protest – at least in the minds of millions of Americans who watched their televisions last weekend.
And like Morgan, viewers saw only bitter women filled with Trump-hating venom on display. If that’s the optic firmly embedded in the nation’s mind, feminists and their radical allies have done themselves only harm. They’re merely pushing their fellow citizens further to the right.
UPDATE: For further discussion, see
Sisters No More, by Neomie Emery, Washington Examiner — she argues that about 1,000,000 women turned out for the Women’s March across a nation of at least 100,000,000 adult women.
Washington March: Women’s Solidarity is a Mirage, by Margaret Wente, The Globe and Mail — a progressive asks, and answers, this: “But will this weekend’s march change history? Not a chance.”
The real lesson of the Women’s March on Washington is that women are as divided as the country. Gender is not a voting bloc. And the secret of defeating Mr. Trump is not more identity politics, but less. Progressives who want to win must make room for women they despise. That could be hard.
You Didn’t Vote for TRUMP – or Did You?, by j.ournal poems, YouTube — a thought-provoking 3:31 minute video.