I deserve a medal. I actually took three whole minutes to listen to angry, arrogant troglodyte, Tomi Lahren and her strawman filled rant about the peaceful and impressive protest of nearly 3 million women the Saturday after Donald Trump's Inauguration. As per typical, she missed the whole point (likely on purpose) and spews erroneous rhetorical bullshit at the function from her expensive set.There are many things wrong with what she has to say, not the least of which is that she (like so many others) is either ignorant of what the function was about or pretends to be so. According to her (and many), all the men, women, and children who stood for women's equality on January 21st are just sore losers. Whining 'snowflakes' who should shut up and accept that Donald Trump is 'their president'. You know, like right wingers did of Obama in 2008.
Here are a couple of refutations, though, for anyone interested:
-She accuses the marchers of "hissing at well-dressed men". Citation needed. But even if that were true of a few people at the marches, who the fuck cares? Honestly. Ohh, were they hissed at? How upsetting that must have been! Almost like getting followed down a street and being told, repeatedly, to smile, and then being called a bitch when you don't.
- She says that the march was not an inclusive one, but rather "a dozen special interests groups marching together, not to advance the nation as a whole, but rather their own special interest." Okay, well, this one is easily debunked. Special interest groups attended, those groups didn't make up the majority of the march. Most women showed up by themselves or in small groups, unaffiliated.
But let's get to the meat of this. The implication that Trump is inclusive while the Women's Marches are not is laughable. I've been openly critical of the Women's March's explicit absence of sex workers from their groups of people who are specifically marginalized in America. And, yes, the march wasn't fertile ground for pro-life groups. For one, pro-life groups are working hard to limit women's reproductive rights, so this is just common sensical. Here's the thing. Even if the Women's March excluded some people, who can possibly say that Trump doesn't exclude more? His anti-Mexican and Latino rhetoric is exclusionary. His law and order, pro-DEA stance is exclusionary. And, btw, have you ever seen an assemblage of Trump supporters even one-tenth as diverse as the women's march? Save your bullshit fake outrage about lack of 'inclusiveness' for people who actually believe you give a shit, Tomi.
-She continues her phony outrage by juxtaposing pictures of the signs left at Trump Hotel and a 'Fuck Trump' sign with 'environmentalism' and 'tolerance' respectively. These are such tired arguments from the right. Is the left often 'intolerant'? Yes. Hell yes. They can be the biggest hypocrites in the world on the issue of tolerance. But singling out the Commander in Cheif for outrage and anger when he's campaigned on Nationalistic populism is 100% justified. Being 'tolerant' doesn't mean you let people do bullshit things and say nothing about it. It doesn't mean you keep quiet when you see injustice. And, for the last time, the signs were dropped in front of Trump Hotel deliberately. It wasn't just litter. It was a point of protest and I promise someone was paid to remove them, so everyone take a pill and relax.
-She says, "American women, the most privileged and blessed women on earth," (citation needed) were marching for "subsidized Abortions". WRONG. Nope. Not true. I didn't meet a single person at the March in San Antonio who was marching for subsidized abortions. What they believe is that women should have reasonable access to abortions. That is very different, Tomi. The reason abortion is such an issue in these marches is because red states around the country are trying to limit women's access to abortion every day. They pass bill after bill that gets spanked in the courts. If Trump is given the ability to stack the SCOTUS, it might make it so one of these bills actually gets upheld. And that would be catastrophic for women's health.
-She, then, goes on to that tired argument about the #WomensMarch being pointless and useless. But that she was part of an 'inclusionary march...into the voting booths'. For one, so were the women marching. Do you imagine they didn't also vote? They just happened to lose. But more than that, are you arguing that voting is more important that the constitutionally protected right to protest? She insists that all of this was just 'causing a scene' with no hope of benefit. Please tell Martin Luther King and the Suffragettes how protests don't work. Hell, the Tea Party was so successful more than fifty Tea Party Candidates were elected to U.S. Congress!
See, the thing is, Tomi, you enjoy an immense amount of privilege because people that came before you protested things that were unjust. I imagine you'd be one of the women in the early 20th century claiming the women standing in front of the White House with 'Votes for Women' signs were rabble rousers 'too ugly to get a man to keep them in line'.
-She is obsessed with Democrat/Republican rhetoric, but these marches were about more than a political party. Libertarians who never believed their candidate would win the election were there. Independents were there. This wasn't a Democrat function. It was a grassroots movement...Just like that Tea Party Movement that I'm sure you did not think was a waste of time or causing a scene or 'throwing a fit'. Funny how when your own ideas are represented in a protest you think it has value. When it is opposing views, they should just go home and shut up.
-She then, hilariously, posits that "outspoken people like me are a threat to your bubble". I'm sorry, is there any plane of existence, on this planet or any other, that Tomi Lahren doesn't exist in an echo chamber or bubble? Come on, girl, your entire business is predicated on keeping people in a bubble. Get out of here with that. Pot. Meet Kettle.
-Multiple times, she refers to Trump Supporters as the 'Silent Majority'. Literally, no one on earth could accuse Trump Supports, and specifically her, of being silent. I wish she'd be silent occasionally. But more than that, you aren't the majority either. You won the election. That doesn't mean you are the majority. For one, you lost the popular vote which means, by definition, you are not the majority. And that leaves out the many millions who didn't even vote because they didn't give one blessed fuck about Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.
-Then she explains all the terrible things that have happened to America in the eight years of Obama's presidency (jeez, she's giving one man a lot of credit). She claims we are "less American". What does that even mean? Also, citation needed. She says that in eight years "men have been encouraged to be less manly and women to be less womanly". Jesus. What does this have to do with the president and how would Trump fix it? Mandatory gender role adherence? What a weird thing to be worried about. And finally, she concludes that we've had "eight years of watching jobs go overseas while illegals pour in". Is there an eye-roll emoji? Because this needs one. For one, outsourcing isn't new, and Trump is a huge fan of outsourcing. Most of his stuff is not made here. Secondly, Obama deported more undocumented immigrants than any president in history. Not that 'illegals' are America's problem in the first place.
Everything will be all good now, though, because Trump is a 'real' American who wants to make us great. You won, Tomi. Why are you still so angry?
In other parts of the interwebs, human garbage dumpster, Matt Walsh points out that women are totally equal, so what are we whining about. The irony of this coming from a guy who thinks women shouldn't work and that gay people don't deserve equal rights is staggering. He tweeted this:
Matt, someone should explain the difference between legal and actual equality to you. A group can be 'legally' equal but still face discrimination, social inequality, and targetted laws against them. Just look up the difference in crack and cocaine offense sentencing, or any number of the sexist laws certain states are passing to shut down women's health clinics and shame women. Saying that women are equal because we have legal equality is like saying blacks were equal in 1870 because of the 15th Amendment.
I imagine it's hard for you, Matt, to perceive these injustices and inequalities while you sip your hipster-brand whiskey, basking in your echo-chamber of other white dudes telling you how 'on-point' you are for sticking it to these 'snowflake whiners'. It would require empathy, compassion, and an ability to see past yourself - skills you've made it clear you don't possess. But remember, just because you blog or tweet about something doesn't mean that what you say is gospel fact. Each time you ignore that blatant injustice exists, you show yourself for the idiotic, dimwit you are.
I have some advice for anyone else sharing these tweets, videos, and this rhetoric. Before you speak up about the Women's Marches around the world, why don't you try talking to some of the people who went about why they were there and what is important to them rather than erecting strawmen because you are upset that millions had the audacity to stand up for something that doesn't matter to you.
No comments:
Post a Comment