Women's March on London

[Earl Aelfheah]

Glad you enjoyed it sjsl.

[Angelina]

Not just London...

some of the signs are shown on this link

https://www.buzzfeed.com/juliareinstein/best-womens-march-signs?bffbmain&ref=bffbmain&utm_term=.bagjjnYpJa#.mf4VVmnb3v

[civilservant]

there were loads of men there as well, an inclusive and positive event with estimated attendance 100k

many carried banners reading 'girls just want to have fundamental rights' - nothing wrong with that!

[Abe_froeman]

Did anyone point out to the women's march that in this country we are so progessive and egalitarian that our prime minister is actually a woman?

[alice]

ha ha!

[Angelina]

no, I don't think that came up....it's all about america..

It's also interesting that this is all focused on Trump and not the actual half of the American citizens who voted for him... I would think that promotion of education in the local communities is as important - if not MORE important than complaining about Donald.

[Catherine W]

It was a welcome breath of fresh air and a really positive experience. Getting offline and meeting likeminded people was the highlight. Unfortunately we missed the speeches so I can't comment. Solidarity for the people of America was a driving factor for the march. But I agree a more specific agenda would have made it easier to understand.

[rendelharris]

Angelina Wrote:

> It's also interesting that this is all focused on

> Trump and not the actual half of the American

> citizens who voted for him...

It's worth noting that actually only 27% of those entitled to vote voted for Trump, so 73% of Americans didn't vote for him. As with Brexit, galvanising apathetic voters would seem to be the real problem...easier said than done.

[Jah Lush]

Fourteen powerful photos that show the unity of women's marches around the world.

https://mic.com/articles/166242/14-powerful-photos-that-show-the-unity-of-women-s-marches-around-the-world#.4C4RrGjJ9

[Sue]

Thanks for posting those photos, Jah Lush.

[civilservant]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Did anyone point out to the women's march that in

> this country we are so progessive and egalitarian

> that our prime minister is actually a woman?

a distinction shared by Ceylon and India >50 years ago, and Israel, Pakistan and Bangladesh >40 years ago (of course mustn't forget us in 1979 for 11 years!) but unlike our current PM, all of these women were elected to the role by their putatively progressive and egalitarian countries

[nxjen]

.

[Mick Mac]

rendelharris Wrote:

>

> It's worth noting that actually only 27% of those

> entitled to vote voted for Trump, so 73% of

> Americans didn't vote for him. As with Brexit,

> galvanising apathetic voters would seem to be the

> real problem...easier said than done.

I think he won the election - the rules of which are clearly set out in advance.

[Mick Mac]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> It's worth noting that actually only 27% of those

> entitled to vote voted for Trump, so 73% of

> Americans didn't vote for him. As with Brexit,

> galvanising apathetic voters would seem to be the

> real problem...easier said than done.

Likewise less than 1% of the female population marched on Sunday - are we to make any assumptions about the views of the other >99% being unsupportive?

[Alan Medic]

27% of the electorate is quite a lot more people than put May in power or the Queen for that matter. I still think he is an idiot though.

[JohnL]

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 27% of the electorate is quite a lot more people

> than put May in power or the Queen for that

> matter. I still think he is an idiot though.

I'm trying not to judge him before he makes his first big mess up.

He might be lucky ... or he could be remembered like

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_North,_Lord_North

[????]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Angelina Wrote:

>

> > It's also interesting that this is all focused

> on

> > Trump and not the actual half of the American

> > citizens who voted for him...

>

> It's worth noting that actually only 27% of those

> entitled to vote voted for Trump, so 73% of

> Americans didn't vote for him. As with Brexit,

> galvanising apathetic voters would seem to be the

> real problem...easier said than done.

Turnout for the Brexit referendum was 71%, which was higher than the 66% turnout in the GE . GE turnout had been improving since its nadir in 1997 (sub 60%)

[TheCat]

So, I'm not a fan at all of Piers Morgan, and have similar views of the Daily Mail.....but given Piers has stirred up so much 'controversy' over his comments on the Women's March, I thought I'd go and read what he said in his article on the weekend....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4148206/PIERS-MORGAN-Madonna-Bomb-threats-don-t-Trump-hate.html

Personally I cant say I disagree with too much that he has actually written here.....

[Mick Mac]

Piers:

It?s about striving to be so good at what you do that your gender is irrelevant, then making sure you are rewarded in the same way as a man. That, surely, is true equality?

As new British Prime Minister Theresa May said yesterday when she was asked what anti-sexism message she would have for President Trump when they meet on Friday: ?When I sit down, I think the biggest statement that will be made about the role of women is that I will be there as a female prime minister, talking directly to him about the interests we share.?

Halle-bloody-lujah!

THAT is a strong, empowered woman.

Theresa May didn?t need to march for her rights as a woman; she let her ability do the talking by marching up the ladder of her profession so capably that she?s now the most powerful person in Britain.

As a result, she has put herself in a position to make the very decisions that will protect and further women?s rights.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4148206/PIERS-MORGAN-Madonna-Bomb-threats-don-t-Trump-hate.html#ixzz4WgeBdXYh

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Loz]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Angelina Wrote:

>

> > It's also interesting that this is all focused on

> > Trump and not the actual half of the American

> > citizens who voted for him...

>

> It's worth noting that actually only 27% of those

> entitled to vote voted for Trump, so 73% of

> Americans didn't vote for him. As with Brexit,

> galvanising apathetic voters would seem to be the

> real problem...easier said than done.

No, it's not worth noting that. At all.

God, I hate this ridiculous argument that keeps popping up in so many places that 'x% of people DIDN'T vote for whatever', by somehow taking into account the unknown views of people that couldn't be bothered enough to get off their backsides to exercise their right to vote. Don't care if it's Trump, Brexit or what video to borrow from the store (OK, showing my age there): not voting is accepting and validating the result, whatever it is.

[Jenny1]

So TheCat and Mick Mac. What do you think about Mike Pence's record on women's health issues? And how would you (if you were American) feel about the incoming administration as a result of that record? Might you be moved to demonstrate to make your views felt? (no matter if you were male or female)

Also specifically TheCat. Having heard the whole of Madonna's speech (as I'm sure you have) .....do you still feel Piers Morgan's interpretation to be accurate?

[Mick Mac]

Jenny1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So TheCat and Mick Mac.

Sorry - is there something I have said that suggests I don't agree with this march or women's rights?

[JohnL]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> God, I hate this ridiculous argument that keeps

> popping up in so many places that 'x% of people

> DIDN'T vote for whatever', by somehow taking into

> account the unknown views of people that couldn't

> be bothered enough to get off their backsides to

> exercise their right to vote. Don't care if it's

> Trump, Brexit or what video to borrow from the

> store (OK, showing my age there): not voting is

> accepting and validating the result, whatever it

> is.

I remember a huge storm and stations in Central

London flooding. Many people gave up and went to

the pub.

Also 16-18 year olds should have been allowed to vote

- it's their future (not mine at 50)

edit: that was Brexit - and when I knew leave would win.

[rendelharris]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rendelharris Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Angelina Wrote:

> >

> > > It's also interesting that this is all focused

> on

> > > Trump and not the actual half of the American

> > > citizens who voted for him...

> >

> > It's worth noting that actually only 27% of

> those

> > entitled to vote voted for Trump, so 73% of

> > Americans didn't vote for him. As with Brexit,

> > galvanising apathetic voters would seem to be

> the

> > real problem...easier said than done.

>

> No, it's not worth noting that. At all.

>

> God, I hate this ridiculous argument that keeps

> popping up in so many places that 'x% of people

> DIDN'T vote for whatever', by somehow taking into

> account the unknown views of people that couldn't

> be bothered enough to get off their backsides to

> exercise their right to vote. Don't care if it's

> Trump, Brexit or what video to borrow from the

> store (OK, showing my age there): not voting is

> accepting and validating the result, whatever it

> is.

That's not what I was arguing at all Loz. If people don't vote, tough, and their absence does not invalidate a ballot. The reason I mentioned this is that I was replying to Angelina's comment "It's also interesting that this is all focused on Trump and not the actual half of the American citizens who voted for him..." - simply making the point that we cannot assume that 50% of all Americans support Trump, we can only know that for sure about the 27% who voted for him, and in no way saying that invalidates his election.

[TheCat]

Jenny1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So TheCat and Mick Mac. What do you think about

> Mike Pence's record on women's health issues? And

> how would you (if you were American) feel about

> the incoming administration as a result of that

> record? Might you be moved to demonstrate to make

> your views felt? (no matter if you were male or

> female)

>

> Also specifically TheCat. Having heard the whole

> of Madonna's speech (as I'm sure you have) .....do

> you still feel Piers Morgan's interpretation to be

> accurate?

I don't disagree that Trump and his administration have issues with their perceptions of women in the world, and there are issues which should be protested. I do have issues with some of the rehortic around these marches, where I feel the extremist feminist element has let those who truly believe in equality down. When I read banners like "the future is female", how am I meant to get on board with such a divisive slogan, and also look my son in the eye and tell him that according to these people (who claim to espouse equality) the future is not for him.

I haven't heard all of madonnas speech, as her shrieking is quite off-putting, but I have read a full transcript, and there's no getting around the fact that she said she has been thinking about blowing up the white house. Which for a public figure such as her to say is totally out of line in my view. Other than that, Jenny, where would you take issue with what piers Morgan has written?