Re: yep it's already started!
 

Yeah, that sounds more pro-US to me ...

Re: yep it's already started!
 

You didn't answer my question, so I'll ask you again: why would protesting "Donald Trump becoming US President" be "anti-US"? Is any and all protest against a US president, "anti US"?

Given Trump's behaviour and actions, protesting Trump seems pretty consistent with the longstanding agenda for these marches of promoting women's rights.

Re: yep it's already started!
 

I guess Pulaski is a fan of "lèse majesté".

Re: yep it's already started!
 

In the words of Lord Percy: "Who knows, or dares to dream ... ?"

Re: yep it's already started!
 

I did, I think the protests against the US President were predominantly anti-US in flavour. You don't have to agree, and I wouldn't expect you to.

So to my question that you ignored, there are many countries with appaling records on treatment of and rights for women, so why did a protest that, according to you, was planned before the US election and was for "women's rights" become a protest against a businessman who became US President? Aren't there more important issues for women to be protesting over? :unsure:

Re: yep it's already started!
 

Is any and all protest against a US president anti-US?

Not ignored at all; I suggest you re-read my post along with posts 90, 96 and 97.

Re: yep it's already started!
 

The insistence on pigeonholing the marches is a little ridiculous, to be honest. Several million people (plenty of whom weren't women) marched in hundreds of cities around the world. Trying to insist that they all must have marched for the same reason is pretty asinine. Some marched to protest Trump. Some marched to protest governmental interference in women's reproductive health. Some marched to support LGBTQ rights. Some marched to support women's rights. The intentions of some of those who marched clearly didn't perfectly align with the intentions of the original organizers, but everybody who marched did so for issues that were important to them. I'm sure they're all extremely sorry that they didn't run it by you first.

It does sadden me that, by all accounts, many pro-life women were told they wouldn't be welcome at the marches. Given the myriad issues that were raised, and the lack of focus on a single issue, barring a specific group of people simply because they don't agree with every issue is more than a little unfriendly and isolationist in a time when we really ought to be reaching across the divide and striving for unity.

Re: yep it's already started!
 

Agreed, I think this was a tactical error on the part of the organizers and one that will likely be exploited by their opponents.

Re: yep it's already started!
 

It's nothing to do with me! I was only commenting on the fact that the dominant media reporting is that the marches were "anti-Trump". Maybe you'll agree with Donald.Trump himself that the media have an irritating habit of putting their own spin on stories, and a spin that fits the media agenda, which is currently that, despite only four days in office, he is "unpopular".

Re: yep it's already started!
 

None of which answer my question, except by asking other questions. :rolleyes:

And in any case your answers are full of the sort of strawman arguments that you so love to criticize me for. Equality means equality, and I never suggested that women should "settle" for anything less, but there are many issues that are more significant to women around the world than who is the President of the United States - which is one issue that they really can't change. But there are many issues that can be changed, but they got lost, literally "in the crowd" of the protests against Donald Trump. :(

Re: yep it's already started!
 

Not sure why you object to the word "unpopular" given his approval rating is way lower than any incoming president there's been polling for:

"The average disapproval rating before Trump was just 10 percent. Trump’s is 35 percentage points higher than that."

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...s-performance/

Re: yep it's already started!
 

I was referring to:

Yes, I absolutely agree that most media outlets spin stories. In both directions. I actually think that the obvious bias in media is becoming a huge issue when it comes to an educated populace. People love confirmation bias, so we pick our media sources accordingly and continue to live in our safe little echo chambers.

The media chooses to print stories which will appeal to their readers/viewers and various social issues go through periods of being fashionable, and therefore guarantee clicks and ad revenue. Because the media no longer generate most of their revenue from print editions, they have to publish stories which appeal to their specific demographic. Trump haters want to read about what an asshole he is, whereas Trump voters don't want to ever have to admit that they may have been wrong. The truth, as always, is somewhere in between.

I didn't march because, at the moment, I don't feel I have anything to march about. If he creates a muslim registry, or tries to interfere with Roe v. Wade, or tries to roll back the progress we've made on LGBTQ rights, I'll march. In the mean time, I'm feeling more than a little guilty that, even though I disagreed with Obama's policies on drone attacks and the Middle East, I never once took any action against those policies. I felt I couldn't in all good conscience go out and march against something that hasn't happened yet and may never happen, having sat idly by while the previous administration carried out what are, in my opinion, inhumane attacks against other human beings.

Since the election, I've tried very hard to be more introspective and to broaden my selection of media in order to escape from my self-imposed bubble and to better understand the other side. I totally agree with what Carey Wedler says in this video - my only issue with it is that it could just as easily be applied to Republicans as to Democrats. If we're to find common ground, we can't start slinging mud unless we're willing to accept a little mud in our own faces as well.

Re: yep it's already started!
 

Another straw man. Quotation marks are used to mark things that are being quoted, and I was quoting the media reports, so I used quotation marks.

Re: yep it's already started!
 

You were claiming that the media saying Trump is "unpopular" is media spin. It isn't. It's backed up by opinion polls.

"Maybe you'll agree with Donald.Trump himself that the media have an irritating habit of putting their own spin on stories, and a spin that fits the media agenda, which is currently that, despite only four days in office, he is "unpopular".

But, hey, if you agree that Trump is unpopular then we are making some progress.

Re: yep it's already started!
 

I don't think that's the case. It wasn't "pro-life women" ... it was pro-life organizations. If they were planning to march as an organization, they were asked not to come. It seems to me that makes sense. White people are welcome at civil rights marches - the KKK ... not so much.